Allowed

Sonu and Another v. State of Up

Allahabad HC18 Jan 2021BAIL/3433/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a criminal bail application under the U.P. Gangsters Act, the Allahabad High Court allowed the bail petition filed by Sonu and Pintu. The court held that applicants made out a fit case for bail, ordering their release upon furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each.

What did the court decide?

Applicants released on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each on specified conditions.

Sonu and Another Vs State of Up — Property and Title | Allahabad HC (2021)

¶1

Court No. - 72

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 3433 of 2021

¶3

Applicant :- Sonu And Another Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Swati Agrawal Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Sanjay Kumar Singh,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned AGA and perused the record.

¶6

By means of this application, the applicants, who are involved in case crime no. 208 of 2019, under Sections 3(1) of U.P. Gangsters and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, P.S. Phoolpur, District-Azamgarh, are seeking enlargement on bail during the trial.

¶7

According to the gang chart, the applicants are said to have been involved in one criminal case, in which they have already been enlarged on bail, copy of bail order has been brought on record as Annexure No. 3 to the bail application. Applicants have falsely been implicated in the present case due to police rivalry. They are not a member of any gang. There is no prospect of trial of the present case being concluded in near future due to heavy dockets. The applicants are not a previous convict. The applicants are languishing in jail since 05.05.2029 and in case they are enlarged on bail they will not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶8

Learned AGA has opposed the prayer of bail.

¶9

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, I am of the view that the applicants have made out a fit case for bail. Hence, the bail application is hereby allowed.

¶10

Let the applicants Sonu and Pintu , be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-

¶11

(i) The applicants shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence

¶12

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.

¶13

(ii) The applicants 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 them under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶14

(iii) In case, the applicants misuse 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.

¶15

(iv) The applicants 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 them in accordance with law.

¶16

(v) The applicants shall file computer generated copy of this order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad.

¶17

(vi) The computer generated copy of this order shall be self attested by the counsel of the party concerned.

¶18

(vii) 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.

¶19

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. It is further clarified that 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.

¶20

Order Date :- 18.1.2021 AK Pandey

Sonu and Another v. State of Up

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sonu and Another v. State of Up

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

Irshad Vs State of U.P.

Chandrapal Vs State of U.P.

Aazad Vs State of U.P.

Ashish Singh Vs State of U.P.

Dr Krishna Lal Patel @ Dr K.L.Patel Vs State of U.P.

Dr Krishna Lal Patel @ Dr K.L.Patel Vs State of U.P.