Allowed

Gulabu Yadav@ Gulab Yadav v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC22 Jun 2021BAIL/19708/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The applicant applied for bail under the U.P. Gangster and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, alleging false implication. The Single Judge granted bail on a personal bond and sureties, imposing prudent conditions regarding bail misuse and trial attendance. No prosecution witnesses were produced or cross-examined.

What did the court decide?

The applicant was released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each, subject to verifying sureties and adhering to strict bail conditions.

Gulabu Yadav@ Gulab Yadav Vs State of U.P. — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Allahabad HC (2021)

¶1

Court No. - 78

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 19708 of 2021

¶3

Applicant :- Gulabu Yadav@ Gulab Yadav Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Santosh Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Shekhar Kumar Yadav,J.

¶5

This matter is listed for hearing through video conferencing. Link has been sent to the respective learned counsels. Learned Counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State are connected through the link.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned A.G.A for the State and perused the record.

¶7

By means of this application, the applicant who is involved in Case Crime No.12 of 2021, under Sections 3(1) of U.P. Gangster and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, Police Station Dullahpur, District Ghazipur, is seeking enlargement on bail during the trial.

¶8

Submission made by learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. He further submits that the applicant is nothing to do with the aforesaid offence. He further submits that two cases have been shown to be registered against the applicant in which the applicant has already been released on bail by the lower court. He further submits that the applicant is not the active member of any gang. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that if the applicant is released on bail the applicant undertakes that he will not misuse the liberty of bail. He further submits that the applicant is innocent and he is languishing in jail since 17.03.2021.

¶9

Learned counsel for the informant as well as learned A.G.A opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid facts and the legal submissions as argued by the learned counsel for the applicant.

¶10

Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused and submissions of learned counsel for the parties, I am of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail.

¶11

Let the applicant Gulabu Yadav @ Gulab Yadav, who is involved in Case Crime No.12 of 2021, under Sections 3(1) of U.P. Gangster and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, Police Station Dullahpur, District Ghazipur, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified.

¶12

(i) THE APPLICANT SHALL FILE AN UNDERTAKING TO THE EFFECT THAT HE SHALL NOT SEEK ANY ADJOURNMENT ON THE DATE 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.

¶13

(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 IPC.

¶14

(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., MAY BE ISSUED AND IF 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 IPC.

¶15

(iv) THE APPLICANT SHALL REMAIN PRESENT, IN PERSON, BEFORE THE TRIAL COURT ON DATES FIXED FOR (1) OPENING OF THE CASE, (2) FRAMING OF CHARGE AND (3) 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.

¶16

(v) THE TRIAL COURT MAY MAKE ALL POSSIBLE EFFORTS/ENDEAVOUR AND TRY TO CONCLUDE THE TRIAL WITHIN A PERIOD OF ONE YEAR AFTER THE RELEASE OF THE APPLICANT.

¶17

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.

¶18

It is made clear that observations made in granting bail to the applicant shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses.

¶19

The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad. The computer generated copy of such order shall be self attested by the counsel of the party concerned. 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.

¶20

Order Date :- 22.6.2021 pks

Gulabu Yadav@ Gulab Yadav v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gulabu Yadav@ Gulab 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

Sarvesh Singh Vs State of U.P.

Anil Shukla Vs State of U.P.

Himanshu Vs State of U.P. and Another

Fursat Vs State of U.P.

Prashannjeet Vs State of U.P.

Bhagvendra Singh Vs State of U.P.