Allowed

Guddu Yadav v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC19 Dec 2022BAIL/36903/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This is a bail application filed by the applicant seeking release in a case under the U.P. Gangster and Anti-Social Activities Act. The court observed that other co-accused were already released on bail and allowed the application.

What did the court decide?

The applicant was released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties each of the like amount, subject to conditions not to tamper with evidence, influence witnesses, or induce ot

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

¶1

Court No. - 79

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 36903 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Guddu Yadav Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Brij Bhushan Prasad Shrivastava,Ray Sahab Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J.

¶5

Heard Shri Ray Sahab Yadav, the learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Ghanshyam Mishra, the learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶6

The present bail application has been filed by the applicant with the prayer to enlarge him on bail in Case Crime No. 75 of 2022, under Section 3(1) of U.P. Gangster and Anti-Social Activities (prevention) Act, 1986 , P.S. Rudrapur, District Deoria.

¶7

The gang-chart mentions involvement of the applicant in two cases namely (i) Case Crime No. 341 of 2019, under Section 272 I.P.C. and Section 60/63 of Excise Act , P.S. Rudrapur, District Deoria (ii) Case Crime No. 105 of 2022, under Section 60 Excise Act and Section 272 IPC, PS-Rudrapur, District Deoria and in both the cases the applicant has been granted bail. Copies of the bail orders have been annexed as annexure3 to the affidavit filed in support of the bail application.

¶8

In paragraph 4 of the affidavit it has been stated that apart from the cases mentioned in the gang-chart the applicant is also involved 13 other cases, out of which three cases already stand closed and in the remaining 10 cases the applicant has been granted bail.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the co-accused Sunita Devi and Smt. Parwati Devi have already been granted bail by means of orders dated 17.6.2022 and 11.11.2022 passed by this Court in Criminal Misc. Bail Application Nos. 24083 of 2022 and 36674 of 2022.

¶10

It has been averred in the affidavit filed in support of the bail application that the applicant is an innocent person, that he has been falsely implicated in the case, that he is neither a leader nor a member of any gang and he is in jail since 27.7.2022. It has also been stated in the affidavit that there is no possibility of

¶11

the applicant tampering with any evidence and in such circumstances, the applicant is entitled for bail. It is also stated in the affidavit that the applicant will not misuse the liberty of bail and he will fully cooperate in the investigation.

¶12

Per contra , the learned Additional Government Advocate has opposed the prayer for grant of bail but he could not dispute the aforesaid aspects of the case.

¶13

Having regard to the facts that the applicant has already been granted bail in all the cases mentioned in the gang-chart and that the applicant is languishing in jail since 27.7.2022, while both the other co-accused persons have already been granted bail, I am of the view that the applicant has made out a case for being enlarged on bail pending conclusion of the trial. The bail application is accordingly allowed.

¶14

Let the applicant - Guddu Yadav be released on bail in Case Crime No.75 of 2022, under Section 3(1) of U.P. Gangster and Anti-Social Activities (prevention) Act, 1986, P.S. Rudrapur, District Deoria on his furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions:-

¶15

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

¶16

(ii) The applicant will not influence any witness.

¶17

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

¶18

(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.

¶19

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

¶20

Order Date :- 19.12.2022 Deepika

¶21

Digitally signed by :- DEEPIKA SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Guddu Yadav v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Guddu Yadav 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

Ajay Kumar Yadav Vs State of U.P.

Subhash Yadav Vs State of U.P.

Rupak Chaubey Vs State of U.P.

Shama Alias Shyama Saroj Vs State of U.P. and Another

Rashid Khan Vs State of U.P.

Dileep Vs State of U.P.