Allowed

Raj Kumar v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC19 May 2022BAIL/16810/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This is a bail application under the U.P. Gangster and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986. The High Court of Judicature at Allahabad allowed the application, releasing the applicant on bail upon furnishing a personal bond and two sureties, subject to specific conditions regarding court attendance and conduct.

What did the court decide?

The applicant was released on bail upon furnishing a personal bond and two sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned.

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

¶1

Court No. - 75

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 16810 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Raj Kumar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Sunil Kumar Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Chandra Kumar Rai,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Navneet Kumar Mishra, holding the brief of Sri Sunil Kumar Yadav, learned counsel for applicant, learned A.G.A for the State and perused the record.

¶6

Applicant- Raj Kumar seeks bail in Case Crime No.7/2022, under Sections 2/3 of the U.P. Gangster and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, P.S. Fariha, District Firozabad.

¶7

It is submitted that the Gangster Act has been invoked against the applicant on the basis of a solitary case, particulars of which are mentioned in paragraph no. 7 of the affidavit in support of the bail application, wherein the applicant is on bail, bail order is Annexure-3 to the bail application. It is further submitted that co-accused Ravish Kumar has also been granted bail by this Court in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.10390/2022 on 28.4.2022. It is further submitted that the criminal history of the applicant has been satisfactorily explained in paragraph no. 8 of the affidavit in support of the bail application. It is finally submitted that the applicant is in jail since 16.10.2021, undertakes not to misuse the liberty of bail, trial is not likely to be concluded in the near future, he be enlarged on bail.

¶8

Learned AGA has opposed the prayer for bail but could not demonstrate anything contrary to the above submission.

¶9

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case as also the contentions noted above, I am inclined to enlarge the applicant on bail.

¶10

Let the applicant involved in aforesaid case be released on bail on 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:-

¶11

(i) 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. 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.

¶12

(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 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶13

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

¶14

(iv) 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. 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.

¶15

Order Date :- 19.5.2022 C.Prakash

¶16

Digitally signed by CHANDRA PRAKASH Date: 2022.05.19 17:30:01 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Raj Kumar v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Raj Kumar 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

Lakshman @ Bhapi Vs State of U.P.

Labbu @ Lavkush Malik Vs State of U.P.

Parminder Baba Vs State of U.P.

Naina @ Jasveer Vs State of U.P.

Shannu @ Nanhe Vs State of U.P.

Pradumn Yadav Vs State of U.P.