Allowed

Mateen and Ors. v. State of U.P. Thru Secy. Home Lucknow

Allahabad HC7 Jul 2022/5988/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Criminal Misc. Bail Application. Applicants sought bail in a case under the U.P. Gangster Act alleging false implication and police rivalry. The court allowed bail on a personal bond and sureties without expressing an opinion on the merits.

What did the court decide?

Applicants released on bail with personal bond and two sureties each on conditions of no tampering, sincere cooperation, and no new crimes.

Mateen and Ors. Vs State of U.P. Thru Secy. Home Lucknow — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 16

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 5988 of 2022 Applicant :- Mateen And Ors. Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru Secy. Home Lucknow Counsel for Applicant :- Rizwanul Haque Ansari Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶3

Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.

¶4

Heard Sri Rizwanul Haque Ansari, learned counsel for the applicants and Smt. Mamta Pandey, learned A.G.A. for the State and also perused the material available on record.

¶5

By means of the present bail application, the applicants seek bail in Case Crime No.182 of 2022, under Sections 2(B)(XVII)/3 of U.P. Gangster and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, Police Station Neemgaon, District Lakhimpur Kheri, during the pendency of trial.

¶6

It is argued by the learned counsel for the applicants that the prosecution under the Gangsters Act has been launched against the applicants on the basis of one criminal case each shown in the gang chart in which they have already been enlarged on bail by the court concerned. Apart from the case mentioned in the gang chart, the applicant nos.1 to 3 have also been implicated in 11, 9 and 5 cases, respectively. The applicants have been falsely implicated in the present case due to police rivalry. They are not the members of any gang. The applicants are languishing in jail since 2.6.2022 and in case, they are enlarged on bail, they will not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶7

On the other hand, learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail.

¶8

Without expressing any opinion on the merits, the bail application is allowed. Let the applicants - Mateen, Somin and Babu Ali, who are involved in aforesaid crime 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 that :-

¶9

The applicants shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/ pressurizing the witnesses, during the investigation or trial.

¶10

The applicants shall cooperate in the trial sincerely without seeking any adjournment.

¶11

The applicants shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail.

¶12

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. Identity, status and residence proof of the applicants and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted.

¶13

Order Date :- 7.7.2022 Siddhant

¶14

Digitally signed by SIDDHANT SAHU Date: 2022.07.08 12:06:19 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Mateen and Ors. v. State of U.P. Thru Secy. Home Lucknow

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mateen and Ors. v. State of U.P. Thru Secy. 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

Yogendra Narayan Dubey Vs State of U.P. Thru Prin.Secy. Home

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

Ravindra Kishore Vs State of U.P.Thru. Special Investigation Team (S.I.T.) Lko.

Ram Teerath Vs State of U.P.

Nakul Yadav @ Girija Shankar Yadav Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Danish Ali Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.