Allowed

Surendra Yadav v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Allahabad HC22 Nov 2022/13519/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court granted bail to Surendra Yadav in a gangster case. Court noted he was already on bail in other cases and detained since 2019, finding him fit for bail without commenting on case merits.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail with personal bond, two sureties, and conditions regarding witness interference, court attendance, and proclamation consequences.

Surendra Yadav Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 27

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 13519 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Surendra Yadav Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Sanat Singh,Sudhir Kumar,Suhail Kashif

¶4

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Shree Prakash Singh,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Aniruddh Kumar Singh-I, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶7

The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant with a prayer to release the applicant on bail during the trial in Case Crime No. 599 of 2029, under Section 2/3 (1) U.P. Gangster and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, P.S.- Gosaiganj, District - Sultanpur.

¶8

It is contended by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the present case. He further submits that three cases have been shown in the gang chart against the applicant in which he has been enlarged on bail and the same is explained in para 5 of the bail application. He further submits that except the cases mentioned in the gang chart one another case depicted against the applicant in which also, he has been enlarged on bail which is explained in para 4 of the supplementary affidavit. It has also been submitted that the applicant is not involved in any antisocial activities and he is not a member of any gang. He further submits that there is no any other criminal history of the applicant except the present case. The applicant is in jail since 17.07.2019. In case he is granted bail, he will not misuse the liberty and would cooperate in the trial proceedings.

¶9

Per contra, learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer of bail but he could not dispute the fact that the applicant has been enlarged on bail in all the cases and criminal history of the applicant has been explained aforesaid.

¶10

Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and after perusal of record, I find that applicant has been enlarged on bail in the case mentioned in the gang chart and some other cases depicted against the applicant in which also he has been enlarged on bail, coupled with the fact that he is languishing in jail since 17.07.2019, thus without commenting on the merits of

¶11

the case, I find it a fit case for bail.

¶12

Let the applicant- Surendra Yadav involved in the aforementioned 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, with the following conditions:-

¶13

(1) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/ pressurizing the witnesses, or otherwise during the investigation or trial;

¶14

(2) 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. He 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;

¶15

(3) 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.; and

¶16

(4) 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, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶17

The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by the court concerned and in case of breach of any of the above conditions, the court below shall be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicant to prison.

¶18

It is clarified that the observations made in this order are strictly confined to the disposal of this bail application and must not be construed to have any reflection on the merits of the case.

¶19

Order Date :- 22.11.2022 Ujjawal

¶20

Digitally signed by UJJAWAL PARJAPATI Date: 2022.11.22 17:14:53 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Surendra Yadav v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Surendra Yadav v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Musheer @ Museem @ Mohsim Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Sectt. Deptt. of Home Lko.

Jagdish Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Rakesh Kumar and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. through Principal Secretary Home U.P Civil Secretariat Lucknow

Shamshul Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Akhilesh Yadav Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Atiullah Ansari Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.