Allowed

Surendra Kumar Patel v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC9 Sept 2021BAIL/33247/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court allowed an exemption application to waive filing of certified FIR and rejection order copies due to COVID-19 restrictions. The Court then granted bail to the applicant in a trial pending under the U.P. Gangsters Act, subject to specific conditions, without expressing an opinion on the merits of the case.

What did the court decide?

Bail granted to the applicant on personal bond and two sureties with specific undertakings regarding court appearance and conduct; exemption from filing FIR and rejection order copies allowed.

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

¶1

Court No. - 68

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 33247 of 2021

¶3

Applicant :- Surendra Kumar Patel Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Anjani Kumar Rai Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Sanjay Kumar Pachori,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Mangala Prasad Rai, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Sri Anjani Kumar Rai, learned counsel for the applicant; learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record of the case.

¶6

An exemption application has been filed on behalf of the applicant along with present application for exempting the filing of certified copy of the F.I.R. as well as free copy of rejection order, as it could not be made available to the applicant due to COVID-19.

¶7

The exemption application is allowed.

¶8

The filing of certified copy of the F.I.R. and free copy of rejection order, is hereby exempted.

¶9

The present bail application has been filed on behalf of applicant, Surendra Kumar Patel with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 87 of 2021, under Sections 2/3 of U.P. Gangsters and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 Police Station- Phoolpur District- Prayagraj, during pendency of trial.

¶10

It has been submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case due to ulterior motive and on the basis of Case Crime No. 0527 of 2020, under Sections 304, 308, 272, 273 I.P.C. and Sections 60, 60-A, 63, 64-A of the U.P. Excise Act, P.S. Phoolpur, District Prayagraj. In gang-chart annexed as Annexure No. 2 only the aforesaid case has been shown against the applicant, in which applicant has been enlarged on bail by this Court vide order dated 26.07.2021 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 24067 of 2021. It is further submitted that in the aforesaid case applicant was not named in the first information report, there was no direct evidence against the applicant. The first information report was lodged against three persons namely Sangeeta Jaiswal, Jagjit Singh and Shyam Babu Jaiswal and during investigation the name of the applicant has

¶11

been implicated in the aforesaid case. It has also been submitted that co-accuseds, Ajay Kumar Yadav, Rajesh Yadav, and Sunil Kumar Jaiswal @ Kanhaiya, having similar role, has already been enlarged on bail by the Coordinate Benches of this Court vide order dated 06.08.2021, 03.09.2021 and 07.09.2021 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application Nos. 26705 of 2021, 30920 of 2021 and 32913 of 2021 and the applicant is also entitled to be enlarged on bail on the ground of parity. It is next contended that there is no other criminal antecedent to his credit.

¶12

It is further submitted that the applicant is not a member or leader or organizer of a gang and he has not abetted or assisted in the activities of a gang as enumerated in clause (b) of Section 2 of the Act. It is next submitted that there is also no possibility of the applicant either fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the witnesses. The applicant, who is languishing in jail since 06.04.2021, undertakes that he will not misuse the liberty, if granted. It has also been pointed out that in the wake of heavy pendency of cases in the Court, there is no likelihood of any early conclusion of trial.

¶13

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail and has not pointed out any other criminal case except the aforesaid criminal case.

¶14

Upon considering the totality of facts, nature and evidence reflected from record and also taking into consideration the provision of Section 19(4) of the Act and without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case for bail.

¶15

Let applicant, Surendra Kumar Patel be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on his furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions-

¶16

(i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he 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.

¶17

(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.

¶18

(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.

¶19

(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.

¶20

It is clarified that anything said in this order is limited to the purpose of determination of this bail application and will in no way be construed as an expression on the merits of the case. The trial court shall be absolutely free to arrive at its independent conclusions on the basis of evidence led unaffected by anything said in this order.

¶21

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

¶22

The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad, self attested by the petitioner along-with a self attested identity proof of the said person (preferably Aadhar Card) mentioning the mobile number to which the said Aadhar Card is linked.

¶23

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.

¶24

Order Date :- 9.9.2021 Ishan

Surendra Kumar Patel v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Surendra Kumar Patel 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

Mursleem @ Saleem Vs State of U.P.

Imran Vs State of U.P.

Islam Vs State of U.P.

Govinda Vs State of U.P.

Vijay Bahadur Singh Vs State of U.P.

Santosh Kumar Vs State of U.P.