Allowed

Vineeta v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC4 Nov 2022BAIL/49272/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This is a bail application under the U.P. Gangster & Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act 1986. The High Court, without expressing an opinion on the merits, found it to be a fit case for granting bail subject to personal bond and conditions regarding court appearances.

What did the court decide?

Release of the applicant on bail by furnishing personal bond and two reliable sureties on specified conditions.

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

¶1

Court No. - 92

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 49272 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Vineeta Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Satendra Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Gajendra Kumar,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned Additional Government Advocate for the State of U.P. and perused the record.

¶6

The present bail application has been filed by the applicant seeking bail in Case Crime No.258 of 2022, under Section 2/3 of the U.P. Gangster & Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act 1986, Police Station- Bewar, District- Mainpuri.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicants has submitted that the applicant is innocent person and has falsely been implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. It is submitted that in the gang chart annexed with bail application, two criminal cases have been shown against the applicant and in both the cases the applicant has been enlarged on bail. It is submitted that except the present case and the cases shown in the gang chart, applicant has no criminal history to his credit. It is also submitted that there is no apprehension that after being released on bail, the applicant may flee from the course of law or may, otherwise, misuse the liberty of bail. It is further submitted that the applicant is neither a leader nor a member of any gang and she is languishing in jail since 03.09.2022 and the possibility of conclusion of trial in near future is very bleak.

¶8

Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail, but he has not disputed the above contention made by the learned counsel for the applicant.

¶9

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, perusing the record and also considering the nature of allegations, arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, I find it to be a fit case for granting bail.

¶10

Let applicant- Vineeta be released on bail in the aforesaid case on her furnishing personal bond and two reliable sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned

¶11

subject to following conditions:-

¶12

(i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that she 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.

¶13

(ii) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through her counsel. In case of her absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶14

(iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure her 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 her, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶15

(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 her in accordance with law.

¶16

Any violation of above conditions will be treated misuse of bail and learned Court below will be at liberty to pass appropriate order in the matter regarding cancellation of bail.

¶17

Order Date :- 4.11.2022 SK Goswami

¶18

Digitally signed by SHIVAKANT GOSWAMI Date: 2022.11.09 13:50:41 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Vineeta v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vineeta 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Kamal Saini Vs State of U.P.

Faheem Vs State of U.P.

Chanchal Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Rajesh Verma Vs State of U.P.

Sangram Singh Vs State of U.P.

Deepak Vs State of U.P.