Allowed

Mairaj v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC21 Jan 2021BAIL/3246/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 3246 of 2021, the Single Judge (Neeraj Tiwari, J.) granted bail to Mairaj in a case under the U.P. Gangster and Anti Social Activities Act. The applicant undertook not to tamper with evidence or commit new crimes. Bail was subject to specific conditions including attendance at trial stages and consequences of breach.

What did the court decide?

Bail granted on furnishing a personal bond and two local sureties with strict conditions regarding attendance and conduct.

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

¶1

Court No. - 69

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 3246 of 2021

¶3

Applicant :- Mairaj Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Mazhar Ullah Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Neeraj Tiwari,J.

¶5

Supplementary affidavit filed today be taken on record.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State and perused the material placed on record.

¶7

It is submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant that applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case and he has not committed the alleged offence. It is further submitted that one case has been shown against the applicant in the Gang Chart and in the said case, the applicant has been granted bail, copy of the bail order has been annexed as Annexure- 3 to the affidavit filed in support of bail application. Applicant is criminal history of three other cases, which are explained in the affidavit. It is next submitted that there is also no possibility of applicant either fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the witnesses. Applicant who is in jail since 27.8.2020, undertakes that he will not misuse the liberty, if granted.

¶8

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail, but could not dispute the aforesaid facts.

¶9

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and also perusing the material on record, without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, let the applicant Mairaj , involved in Case Crime No. 285 of 2020, under Section- 3(1) of U.P. Gangster and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, Police Station- Tanda, District- Rampur be released on his furnishing a personal bond and two local sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of court concerned. It is further provided that this bail order available on the official website of the High Court will be taken to be the authentic one and certified copy shall be submitted before that court concerned as soon as it is issued.

¶10

This bail order would be subject to the fulfilment of following conditions:-

¶11

The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/ pressurizing the witnesses, during the investigation or trial.

¶12

The applicant shall cooperate in the trial sincerely without seeking any adjournment.

¶13

The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail.

¶14

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;

¶15

In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail 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.

¶16

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 default of this condition is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of his bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.

¶17

In case the applicant has been enlarged on short term bail as per the order of committee constituted under the orders of Hon'ble Supreme Court his bail shall be effective after the period of short term bail comes to an end.

¶18

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

¶19

Order Date :- 21.1.2021 Junaid

Mairaj v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mairaj 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

Sadab Vs State of U.P.

Agyaram Vs State of U.P.

Salim Vs State of U.P.

Sachin and Another Vs State of U.P.

Sachin Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Ekrar @ Jaraila Vs State of U.P.