The Single Judge enlarged the applicant on bail in a gangster case, relying on the principle that bail is not precluded by the nature of the offence. The court imposed strict conditions regarding attendance and procedure before the trial court.
Release on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two local sureties each of like amount.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 58
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 38487 of 2022
Applicant :- Gullu @ Gulveer @ Sonu Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Shiv Sharan Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Shiv Shanker Prasad,J.
Supplementary affidavit filed on behalf of the applicant in the Court today is taken on record.
Heard Mr. Shiv Sharan Tripathi, learned counsel for the applicant and Mr. Sharavan Kumar Ojha, learned A.G.A. for the State as well as perused the material on record.
The present bail application has been filed by the applicant-Gullu @ Gulveer @ Sonu with a prayer to enlarge him on bail in C ase Crime No. 70 of 2022, under Sections 2/3 of the U.P. Gangster Act and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, Police Station-Pisava, District-Aligarh, during the pendency of the trial.
It has been argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case for the purpose of harassment. False and fabricated prosecution story has been made by the police. There is no reliable evidence against the applicant. It is next argued that in the gang chart only one case is shown against the accused-applicant. It has further been argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant has already been enlarged on bail in the said case, copy of the bail order has been enclosed as Annexure No.-2 to the affidavit accompanying the bail application. Apart from the above, the applicant has no criminal antecedents to his credit. It also argued that the coaccused,namely, Rohit @ Rohit Chaudhary has already enlarged on bail by a Coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 11st August, 2022 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 32686 of 2022. The case of the applicant is on better footing to that of the aforesaid co-accused. As the applicant is also liable to be enlarged on bail. It is next contended that there is no possibility of the applicant of fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the witnesses and in case, the applicant is enlarged on bail, the applicant shall not misuse the liberty of bail. The applicant is in jail since 3rd July, 2022.
Per contra learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail prayer of the applicant but he could not dispute the factual submissions as urged by the learned counsel for the applicant.
Considering the nature of the offence, provision for initiation of cases and release the accused under the U.P. Gangster Act and
Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 , material/evidence brought on record, complicity of the accused, severity of punishment, the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties as well as the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh Versus State of U.P. and another, reported in (2018) 3 SCC 22 , let the applicant involved in aforesaid case crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two local sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to the following conditions:-
(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.
(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.
(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.
(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.
It is clarified that the observations, if any, made in this order are strictly confined to the disposal of the bail application and must not be construed to have any reflection on the ultimate merits of the case.
(Shiv Shanker Prasad, J.)
Order Date :- 31.10.2022
Sushil/-
Digitally signed by SUSHIL KUMAR SINGH Date: 2022.11.01 09:47:29 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the applicant is entitled to be released on bail under the U.P. Gangster Act and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986.
Whether the contention of false implicaton and lack of evidence supports the grant of bail in a gangster case.
What conditions should be imposed while granting bail in a serious offence under the Gangster Act.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Dataram Singh vs. State of U.P.Referred¶10
Dataram Singh Versus State of U.P. and another (2018) 3 SCC 22 · Who else cites this
4 provisions across 3 enactments
Gullu @ Gulveer @ Sonu
Shiv Shanker Prasad
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
