Allowed

Sandeep Yadav v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC11 Jun 2021BAIL/18499/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 18499 of 2021, the Court granted bail to applicant Sandeep Yadav, involved in an offence under the U.P. Gangster and Anti Social Activities Act. Bail was granted subject to specific conditions regarding appearance, tampering with evidence, and cooperation with the trial court.

What did the court decide?

Release on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two local sureties subject to specified conditions.

Sandeep Yadav Vs State of U.P. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2021)

¶1

Court No. - 70

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 18499 of 2021

¶3

Applicant :- Sandeep Yadav Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Amit Daga,Arun Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Ali Zamin,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. representing the State through video conferencing and perused the record.

¶6

The present bail application has been filed by the applicant with a prayer to enlarge him on bail in Case Crime No.728 of 2020, under Section 2/3 of U.P. Gangster and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, Police Station-Sipri Bazar, District-Jhansi.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is submitted that as per gang chart annexed as annexure-2 to the affidavit, applicant has only one case, in which he has been enlarged on bail by co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 25.11.2020, copy of the bail order has been annexed as annexure-3 to the bail application. It is further submitted that in addition to the case registered in the gang chart, there are 15 more cases which have been explained in paragraph-10 of the affidavit filed in support of bail application as well as in paragraph-2 of the supplementary affidavit. It is further submitted that applicant is in jail since 22.12.2020 and there is no likelihood of applicant's fleeing from course of justice or tampering with evidence in case he is released on bail or involving in any criminal case in future.

¶8

Per contra, learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail prayer of the applicant but could not dispute the aforesaid fact argued by learned counsel for the applicant.

¶9

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case as well as submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties and also perusing the material on record, without expressing any opinion on merit of the case, the applicant is entitled for bail, let the applicant- Sandeep Yadav involved in aforesaid case crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two local sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to the following conditions :-

¶10

(i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he will not tamper with the evidence and will not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witnesses and will cooperate with the trial. The applicant shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law.

¶11

(ii) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶12

(iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶13

(iv) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. If in the opinion of the trial court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.

¶14

The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad.

¶15

The concerned Court/Authority/Official shall verify the authenticity of such computerized copy of the order from the official website of High Court Allahabad and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.

¶16

Order Date :- 11.6.2021 SK Goswami

Sandeep Yadav v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sandeep Yadav v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Akhand Pratap Singh Vs State of U.P.

Veer Pratap Singh Vs State of U.P.

Chhotelal Vs State of U.P.

Jayveer Yadav and Another Vs State of U.P.

Rajat Singh @ Mintu Thakur Vs State of U.P.

Sunil Kushwaha (Mithya) Vs State of U.P.