Court allowed bail application in a case under UP Gangsters and Anti-Social Activities Act, 1986, noting jail overcrowding and lack of gang membership evidence.
Releasement of applicant on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two sureties subject to specific conditions.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 66
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 32680 of 2021 Applicant :- Shabir @ Badde Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Sushil Kumar Dubey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Ajay Bhanot,J.
Heard Sri Sushil Kumar Dubey, learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State.
A first information report was lodged against the applicant as Case Crime No. 303 of 2021 at Police Station-Kotwali Auraiya, District- Auraiya 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 Additional District & Sessions Judge (F.T.C.)/Special Judge (Gangster), Auraiya on 15.07.2021.
The applicant is in jail since 28.02.2021, pursuant to the said F.I.R.
Sri Sushil Kumar Dubey, learned counsel for 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. The applicant has explained his criminal history.
Learned AGA however contends that the applicant has failed to disclose criminal history of Case Crime no. 1030 of 2020 under Section 41/411 I.P.C.
Rejoining the issue learned counsel for the applicant contends that the aforesaid case has no bearing on the instant case. Learned counsel for the applicant has explained the rest of the criminal history of the applicant. 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.
Learned A.G.A. could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions from the record. However he does not dispute the criminal history of the applicant as disclosed in the bail application.
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.
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.
In the light of the preceding discussion and without making any observations on the merits of the case, the bail application is allowed.
Let the applicant- Shabir @ Badde involved in Case Crime No. 303 of 2021 at Police Station-Kotwali Auraiya, DistrictAuraiya under Section 3(1) of the Uttar Pradesh Gangsters and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986., be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions.
In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move bail cancellation application before this Court.
Order Date :- 29.11.2021 Pravin
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the applicant is entitled to bail in the undertrial case under the UP Gangsters and Anti-Social Activities Act, 1986.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Shabir @ Badde
State of U.P.
Ajay Bhanot
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
