Allowed

Vedpal v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC5 Apr 2022BAIL/10893/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a bail application under Section 3(1) of the U.P. Gangsters and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, the High Court allowed the applicant's request to be released on bail upon furnishing a personal bond and two sureties, imposing specific conditions to prevent tampering with evidence or witnesses.

What did the court decide?

Allowed bail application; ordered release on personal bond and two sureties in the like amount subject to specific conditions.

Vedpal Vs State of U.P. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 68

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 10893 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Vedpal Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Abhay Krishn Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Ajay Bhanot,J.

¶5

By means of this bail application the applicant has prayed to be enlarged on bail in Case Crime No. 135 of 2021 at Police Station Kolhuyee District Maharajganj, under Sections 3(1) of U.P. Gangsters and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act. The applicant is in jail since 14.03.2021.

¶6

The bail application of the applicant was rejected by learned Additional Sessions Judge (FTC), Maharajganj on 08.02.2022.

¶7

Shri Akanksha Shukla, learned counsel holding brief of Shri Abhay Krishn, learned counsel for the applicant contends that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the instant case. The applicant has been enlarged on bail in the three criminal cases depicted in the gang chart. He is not a member of any criminal gang. Learned counsel for the applicant has explained the criminal history of the applicant and contends that the same has no bearing on the instant case. Lastly it is submitted by learned counsel for applicants that the applicants shall not abscond, and will cooperate in the

¶8

criminal law proceedings. The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence nor influence the witnesses in any manner.

¶9

Shri Sunil Kumar Srivastava, learned AGA for the State could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions from the record. Learned AGA does not contest the criminal history of the applicant as disclosed in the bail application.

¶10

I see merit in the submissions of learned counsel for the applicant and accordingly hold that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail.

¶11

In the light of the preceding discussion and without making any observations on the merits of the case, the bail application is allowed.

¶12

Let the applicant- Vedpal be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number, on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court below. The following conditions be imposed in the interest of justice:-

¶13

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

¶14

(ii) The applicant will not influence any witness.

¶15

(iii) The applicant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted.

¶16

(iv) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted

¶17

with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶18

In case of breach of any of the above condition, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move bail cancellation application before this Court.

¶19

Order Date :- 5.4.2022

¶20

Dhananjai

¶21

Digitally signed by DHANANJAI Date: 2022.04.06 17:12:01 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Vedpal v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vedpal 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Pappu Vs State of U.P.

Sanjeev Shakya Vs State of U.P.

Hasmeer Khan @ Bablu Vs State of U.P.

Virendra Vs State of U.P.

Joheb @ Joeb Vs State of U.P.

Golu Varma Vs State of U.P.