Subhash @ Allu Vs State of U.P.

Court No. - 43

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 45201 of 2022

Applicant :- Subhash @ Allu Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Umesh Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Shiv Shanker Prasad,J.

¶5

Heard Mr. Umesh Kumar, learned counsel for the applicant and the learned A.G.A. for the State as well as perused the material available on record.

¶6

The present bail application has been filed by the applicantSubhash @ Alu with a prayer to enlarge him on bail in C ase Crime No. 460 of 2019, under Sections 2/3 of the U.P. Gangster Act and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, Police Station-Jaithara, District Etah, during the pendency of the trial.

¶7

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, two cases are 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 aforesaid cases, copies of the bail orders have been enclosed as Annexure Nos.-3 and 4 to the affidavit accompanying the bail application. Apart from the above, the applicant has one criminal antecedent to his credit being Crime No. 371 of 2016 (State Vs. Devendra Singh & Others), in which he has been acquitted by the court below vide judgment and order dated 29th August, 2022 passed in Sessions Trial No. 68 of 2019, a copy of which has been placed before this Court to be kept on record. 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 17th November, 2019. As such the applicant has undergone more than two years and ten months of incarceration as on date.

¶8

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.

¶9

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

¶10

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:-

¶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

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.

¶16

(Shiv Shanker Prasad, J.)

¶17

Order Date :- 21.10.2022 Sushil/-

¶18

Digitally signed by SUSHIL KUMAR SINGH Date: 2022.10.21 15:51:50 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Subhash @ Allu v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Subhash @ Allu v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sonu Tiwari Vs State of U.P.

Zahid Vs State of U.P.

Akmal Vs State of U.P.

Munish Vs State of U.P.

Gulfam Vs State of U.P.

Sarfaraj Vs State of U.P.