Allowed

Prem and Another v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lucknow

Allahabad HC21 Jan 2022/513/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Court allowed bail application for applicants Prem and Daya Shanker in a case under the U.P. Gangsters & Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, imposing strict conditions including personal bond, sureties, and undertakings against tampering with evidence or witnesses.

What did the court decide?

Applicants released on bail with personal bond, two sureties each, and multiple conditions including undertakings under the U.P. Gangsters Act and attendance requirements.

Prem and Another Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt… — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 13

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 513 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Prem And Another Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Of Home Lucknow Counsel for Applicant :- Srees Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State and perused the record.

¶6

Learned counsel for the applicants submits that in the gang chart, one case has been shown against the applicant. In that case, the applicants have been enlarged on bail. The bail order is annexed with the affidavit filed in support of the bail application as Annexure No.3.. Apart from the solitary case, there is no other case pending against the applicant. The applicants are in jail since 26.2.2021.

¶7

It is also submitted that the applicant is ready to furnish an undertaking in terms of requirement of Section 19(4)(b) of U.P. Gangsters & Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986.

¶8

It is further submitted that there is no possibility of the applicants of fleeing away from judicial custody or tampering with the witnesses. In case the applicant are enlarged on bail, they shall not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶9

Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid facts as argued by the learned counsel for the applicants.

¶10

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, and also considering the nature of allegations, arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties, for the period for which he is in jail and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case for enlarging the applicant on bail.The application is allowed.

¶11

Let the applicants Prem and Daya Shanker involved in Case Crime No.125/2021 under Section 3(1) U.P. Gangsters & Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, P.S. Ajgain, district Unnao be released on bail on their 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:-

¶12

(i) The applicants will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.

¶13

(ii) The applicants will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.

¶14

(iii) The applicants shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶15

(iv) The applicants 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.

¶16

(v) The applicants shall also file an undertaking in terms of requirement of Section 19(4)(b) of U.P. Gangsters & Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 that he will not indulge in any case or misuse the liberty of bail.

¶17

(vi) 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 him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶18

(vii) 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 them, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶19

Order Date :- 21.1.2022 kkb/

Prem and Another v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lucknow

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Prem and Another v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lucknow

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

Shailesh Kumar Gaur Vs State of U.P. and 3 Ors.

Tauseem Vs State of U.P.Thru Prin.Secy.Home Lucknow

Ritik Mishra Vs State of U.P. Thru Prin. Secy. Home

Prem Vs State of U.P.

Aanand Tiwari Vs State of U.P.

Raju Vs the State of U.P. Thru. Prin.Secy. Home Lucknow