Allowed

Raj Bahadur v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC30 Jul 2021BAIL/21497/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed bail to an applicant accused under the U.P. Gangsters and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act. Relying on the bail of co-accused, the Court granted release on a personal bond and two local sureties, subject to conditions regarding witness tampering and trial attendance.

What did the court decide?

Release of applicant on bail on personal bond and two local sureties of like amount.

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

¶1

Court No. - 66

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 21497 of 2021

¶3

Applicant :- Raj Bahadur Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Bhishm Pal Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Ali Zamin,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material on record.

¶6

The present bail application has been filed by the applicant with a prayer to enlarge him on bail in Case Crime No.136 of 2020, under Section 2/3 of U.P. Gangsters and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, P.S. Rijaur, District Etah.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that as per gang chart four cases have been shown against the applicant in which he has been granted bail. Apart from the gang chart no other case is registered against the applicant. He further submits that the co-accused Narayan and Chetan have been granted bail by coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 08.01.2021 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.45361 of 2020, therefore, the applicant is also entitled for bail. There is no possibility of the applicant of fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the witnesses and, in case, the applicant is enlarged on bail, the applicant shall not misuse the liberty of bail. It is next contended that the applicant is languishing in jail since 13.08.2020.

¶8

Per contra, learned A.G.A. opposed the bail prayer of the applicant but could not dispute the aforesaid facts.

¶9

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case as well as submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties, enlargement of accused on bail in the case mentioned in the gang chart and enlargement of co-accused on bail, without expressing any opinion on merit of the case, the applicant is entitled for bail, let the applicant- Raj Bahadur 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

¶11

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.

¶12

(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.

¶13

(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.

¶14

(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.

¶15

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

¶16

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.

¶17

Order Date :- 30.7.2021 Jitendra

Raj Bahadur v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Raj Bahadur 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

Jitendra Kumar Pandey Vs State of U.P.

Chandra Jeet Chauhan Vs State of U.P.

Pavitra Singh Vs State of U.P.

Sudama Chauhan Vs State of U.P.

Kishan Yadav Vs State of U.P.

Pappu @ Ram Pratap and Another Vs State of U.P.