Allowed

Shakti Singh v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC16 Jul 2022BAIL/19550/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Single Judge granted bail to Shakti Singh in a case under the UP Gangsters Act. The court noted the applicant is not a gang leader, was falsely implicated, and co-accused received bail. Bail granted on personal bond and two sureties.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties, subject to conditions regarding evidence tampering and witness influence.

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

¶1

Court No. - 79

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 19550 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Shakti Singh Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Mahesh Sharma Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Mahesh Sharma, the learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Dinesh Kumar Srivastava, the learned Additional Government Advocate and perused the record.

¶6

The instant application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 2213 of 2021, under Section 2/3 Uttar Pradesh Gangsters and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, Police Station Indrapuram,, District Ghaziabad during pendency of the trial in the Court below.

¶7

The gang-chart mentions two cases against the applicant namely (1) Case Crime No. 1587 of 2019, under Section 8/20 Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 and (2) Case Crime No. 1588 of 2019, under Section 60/63 of Excise Act, in all of which the applicant has been released on bail.

¶8

In the affidavit filed in support of the bail application it has been stated that apart from the two cases mentioned in the gang chart, the applicant has also been implicated in two more cases namely (1) Case Crime No. 244 of 2019, under Section 60/63 of Excise Act and (2) Case Crime No. 1042 of 2019, under Section 60/63 of Excise Act, in both of which the applicant has been granted bail by the learned court below in the year 2019.

¶9

The supplementary affidavit filed in support of the bail application states thast there are four more cases against the applicant namely (1) Case Crime No. 1181 of 2020, under Section 420 IPC, (2) Case Crime No. 1182 of 2020, under Section 60/63/72 of the Excise Act, (3) Case Crime No. 1184 of 2020, under Section 8/20 Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 and (4) Case Crime No. 1186 of 2020, under Section 3/25 Arms Act, in all of which the applicant has been released on bail, copies of bail orders have been filed along with the supplementary affidavit. It has further been stated that all the other three accused persons named in the FIR have already been granted bail.

¶10

The learned counsel for the applicant has further stated that the other co-accused persons namely Mannu Yadav, Anshu alias Anshul Thakur and Himanshu Sharma has already been granted bail by this court vide orders dated 11.02.2022, 18.05.2022 and 21.12.2021 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Applications No. 53429 of 2021, 19730 of 2022 and 49231 of 2021 respectively.

¶11

It has been stated in the affidavit filed in support of the bail application that the applicant is neither a leader nor a member of any gang and he has been falsely implicated in the present case by the police with ulterior motive; he is innocent and he is not involved in any criminal and anti social activities.

¶12

The applicant is languishing in jail since 13.04.2022.

¶13

It has been stated in the affidavit filed in support of the bail application that there is no possibility of the applicant tampering with any evidence. In such circumstances, applicant is entitled for bail. It is also submitted that the applicant is the only male earning member of his family and in case he is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and he will fully cooperate in the investigation.

¶14

Per contra, the learned Additional Government Advocate has opposed the prayer for grant of bail but he could not dispute the fact that the cases set up against the applicant are similar to that set up against the other co-accused persons, who have already been released on bail.

¶15

Keeping in view the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, I find it to be a fit case for grant of bail to the applicant in the aforesaid case.

¶16

In the light of preceding discussion and without making any observation on the merit of the case, the instant bail application is allowed .

¶17

Let the applicant Shakti Singh be released on bail in Case Crime No.2213 of 2021, under Section 2/3 Uttar Pradesh Gangsters and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, Police Station Indrapuram,, District Ghaziabad on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court below, subject to the following conditions:-

¶18

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

¶19

(ii) The applicant will not influence any witness.

¶20

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

¶21

(iv) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make 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 to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶22

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

¶23

Order Date :- 16.7.2022 Ashish Pd.

¶24

Digitally signed by ASHISH PRASAD Date: 2022.07.20 13:11:38 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Shakti Singh v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shakti Singh 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

Kaushal Vs State of U.P. through Secretary Home at Lucknow

Rajan @ Rajendra Singh Vs State of U.P.

Ganga Singh @ Gango Vs State of U.P.

Yogesh Prasad (in Wria 3799 of 2022) Vs U.O.I. Thru.Secy. Information and Technology and Deptt. of Broadcasting and I.T.,New Delhi and Ors.

Rakesh Vs State of U.P.

Bhoora @ Shavej Vs State of U.P.