Allowed

Sarfaraz @ oni v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC22 Nov 2021BAIL/23806/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court considered a bail application filed by an accused under the Uttar Pradesh Gangsters and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act. Balancing false implication claims and jail overcrowding due to the pandemic, the court granted bail with specific conditions.

What did the court decide?

The applicant was enlarged on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two sureties subject to specified conditions.

Sarfaraz @ oni Vs State of U.P. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2021)

¶1

Court No. - 66

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 23806 of 2021

¶3

Applicant :- Sarfaraz @ Oni Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Ram Kumar Dubey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Ajay Bhanot,J.

¶5

Heard Shri Ram Kumar Dubey, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Indra Prakash Srivastava, learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶6

A first information report was lodged against the applicant as Case Crime No.69 of 2021 at Police Station-Dilari, District-Moradabad on 04.04.2021 under Section 3(1) of the Uttar Pradesh Gangsters and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986. The bail application of the applicant was rejected by learned Special Judge (Gangster Act)/Additional District and Sessions Judge, Court No.5, Moradabad on 27.04.2021.

¶7

The applicant is in jail since 17.02.2021, pursuant to the said F.I.R.

¶8

Shri Ram Kumar Dubey, learned counsel for the applicant contends that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the instant case. The applicant has been enlarged on bail in the two criminal cases depicted in the gang chart. He is not a member of any criminal gang. Apart from the above said case, the applicant does not have any criminal history.

¶9

Lastly it is contended by the learned counsel for applicant that the applicant shall not abscond and will fully cooperate in the criminal law proceedings. The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence nor influence the witnesses in any manner.

¶10

Learned A.G.A could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions from the record.

¶11

Courts have taken notice of the overcrowding of jails during the current pandemic situation (Ref.: Suo Motu Writ Petition (c) No. 1/2020, Contagion of COVID 19 Virus in prisons before the Supreme Court of India). These circumstances shall also be factored in while considering bail applications on behalf of accused persons.

¶12

I see merit in the submissions of the learned counsel for the applicant and hold that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail.

¶13

In the light of the preceding discussion and without making any observations on the merits of the case, the bail application is allowed.

¶14

Let the applicant-Sarfaraz @ Oni involved in Case Crime No.69 of 2021 at Police Station-Dilari, District-Moradabad under Section 3(1) of the Uttar Pradesh Gangsters and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, be released on bail on

¶15

furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions.

¶16

The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.

¶17

The applicant will not influence any witness.

¶18

The applicant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted.

¶19

The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶20

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move bail cancellation application before this Court.

¶21

Order Date :- 22.11.2021 Ashish Tripathi

¶22

Digitally signed by Justice Ajay Bhanot Date: 2021.11.22 18:50:11 IST Reason: Document Owner Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Sarfaraz @ oni v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sarfaraz @ oni 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sri Gautam Vs State of U P and 4 Others

Manoj Kumar Rastogi Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Uma Shankar Dixit Vs State of U.P. through Its Principal Secretary,Public Works Department U.P. Govt.and 4 Others

Vikas Hawaldar Vs State of U.P.

Nittar @ Netrapal Vs State of U.P.

Amir Vs State of U.P.