Allowed

Shaukeen v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC2 Dec 2021BAIL/36096/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Granting bail to an applicant implicated under the U.P. Gangster and Anti Social Activities Act, subject to severe conditions including presence in court for specific proceedings and fear of abuse of liberty, while retaining independence of the trial judge.

What did the court decide?

Release of the applicant on personal bond and two sureties, subject to conditions regarding presence in court and undertaking against abuse of bail.

Shaukeen Vs State of U.P. — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Allahabad HC (2021)

¶1

Court No. - 83

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 36096 of 2021

¶3

Applicant :- Shaukeen Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Irshad Ahmad 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. 434 of 2020, under Sections 3 (1) of U.P. Gangster and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, at Police Station Nakhasa, District Sambhal.

¶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 those cases the gangster Act has been slapped upon the applicant. The bail order of the applicant has been filed as annexure no. 2 to the affidavit filed in support of bail application. It has further been submitted that apart from that case there is criminal history of five cases against the applicant. Out of them one case is under section 3/25 Arms Act, which is not covered under the Gangster Act and in remaining four other cases, the applicant is on bail. The bail orders of the applicant has been filed as annexure no. 1 to the supplementary 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 22.9.2020.

¶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 Shaukeen, 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 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.

¶12

(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.

¶13

(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.

¶14

(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.

¶15

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

¶16

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.

¶17

Order Date :- 2.12.2021

¶18

Shaukeen v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shaukeen 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

Pradeep Saxena Vs State of U.P.

Wasim Vs State of U.P.

Mohd. Naseer Vs State of U.P.

Ram Chandra Dubey Vs State of U.P.

Sikandar Gihar Vs State of U.P.

Ram Naresh Singh @ Lala Vs State of U.P.