Allowed

Mahendra Singh v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC28 Sept 2021BAIL/36003/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 36003 of 2021, Court No. 69 Allahabad High Court granted bail to Mahendra Singh under the U.P. Gangster Act. The court imposed several conditions including presence in court, prohibition of adjournment abuse, and potential issuance of proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. if bail is misused.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail on furnishing personal bond and two sureties subject to conditions including attendance and no adjournment abuse.

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

¶1

Court No. - 69

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 36003 of 2021

¶3

Applicant :- Mahendra Singh Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Mohd. Abrar Khan Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Shekhar Kumar Yadav,J.

¶5

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

¶6

This bail application under Section 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure has been filed by the applicant seeking enlargement on bail in Case Crime No. 193 of 2019, under Sections 2/3 (1) of U.P. Gangster and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, at Police Station Kareli, District Prayagraj.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. It has further been submitted that one case has been shown in the gang chart against the applicant in which he has been granted bail and on the basis of that case the gangster Act has been slapped upon the applicant. The bail order of the applicant has been filed as annexure no. 3 to this affidavit filed in support of bail application. Neither the applicant is a member of any gang nor involved in any Anti Social Activities. It has further been submitted that there is no fear of the applicant in Society. He has further submitted that in case the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail. The applicant is in jail since 16.8.2021.

¶8

On the other hand, learned A.G.A. opposes the application for bail.

¶9

Upon hearing learned counsel for the parties, perusal of record and considering the complicity of accused, severity of punishment as well as totality of facts and circumstances, at this stage without commenting on the merits of the case, I find it a fit case for bail.

¶10

Let the applicant Mahendra Singh , who is involved in aforementioned case crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified.

¶11

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

¶12

shall not seek any adjournment on the date 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. (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 IPC.

¶13

(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., may be issued and if 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 IPC.

¶14

(iv) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the Trial Court on dates fixed for (1) opening of the case, (2) framing of charge and (3) 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.

¶15

(v) The Trial Court may make all possible efforts/endeavour and try to conclude the trial within a period of one year after the release of the applicant.

¶16

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

¶17

It is made clear that observations made in granting bail to the applicant shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses.

¶18

The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad.

¶19

The computer generated copy of such order shall be self attested by the counsel of the party concerned.

¶20

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.

¶21

Order Date :- 28.9.2021/A.

Mahendra Singh v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mahendra Singh 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

Murari Vs State of U.P. and Another

Shri Nath Tiwari Vs State of U.P.

Pramod Kumar Pandey @ Kallu Vs State of U.P.

Farid Vs State of U.P.

Rizwan Vs State of U.P.

Ajay Kumar Kushwaha Vs State of U.P.