Allowed

Naseer Ahmad @ Guddu v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC9 Nov 2022BAIL/49881/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single Judge Bail Case. The court released the applicant on bail in a case under the U.P. Gangster Act, 1986, subject to strict conditions requiring personal appearance and an undertaking against seeking adjournments.

What did the court decide?

Release of applicant on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two local sureties subject to strict conditions regarding presence and undertaking against adjournments.

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

¶1

Court No. - 90

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 49881 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Naseer Ahmad @ Guddu Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Ajay Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Shiv Shanker Prasad,J.

¶5

Heard Mr. Ajay Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicant and Mr. Vinod Kumar Singh Parmar, learned counsel for the State as well as perused the material on record.

¶6

The present bail application has been filed by the applicant-Naseer Ahmad @ Guddu with a prayer to enlarge him on bail in C ase Crime No. 338 of 2022, under Sections 2/3 of the U.P. Gangster Act and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, Police Station-Madhotanda, District-Pilibhit, 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 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 aforesaid case, copy of which has been enclosed as Annexure No.-3 to the affidavit accompanying the bail application. Apart from the above, the applicant has no criminal antecedents to his credit. 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 18th August, 2022.

¶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 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

¶10

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 :- 9.11.2022

¶18

Sushil/-

¶19

Digitally signed by SUSHIL KUMAR SINGH Date: 2022.11.10 10:08:42 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Naseer Ahmad @ Guddu v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Naseer Ahmad @ Guddu 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Kalim Vs State of U.P.

Naveen Vishvakarma Vs State of U.P.

Javed Vs State of U.P.

Jabruddin Vs State of U.P.

Bhupendra Sharma Vs State of U.P.

Rustam Beg Beg Vs State of U.P.