Allowed

Rahul v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC7 Dec 2022BAIL/52685/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed the bail application of the applicant charged with offences under the Uttar Pradesh Gangsters and Anti-Social Activities Act. The Court granted bail considering the applicant had already secured bail in all related cases and found no records suggesting a risk of tampering with evidence or absconding.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail with personal bond and two sureties subject to conditions against tampering with evidence or influencing witnesses.

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

¶1

Court No. - 79

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 52685 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Rahul Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Sujata Choudhary, Mohit Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Mohit Kumar Singh, the learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Amit Kumar Shukla, the learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶6

The instant application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 631 of 2021, under Section 2/3 Uttar Pradesh Gangsters and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, Police Station Hapur Dehat, District Hapur. The aforesaid case has been registered on the basis of a First Information Report lodged by the Station House Officer of the Police Station against two named accused persons, including the applicant, stating that all the accused persons have formed an organized gang and they are engaged in earning their livelihood by committing offences.

¶7

The gang chart mentions involvement of the applicant in two cases - (i) Case Crime No. 60 of 2020, under Sections 379, 411 IPC, (ii) Case Crime No. 63 of 2020, under Sections 411, 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC, in both of which the applicant has already been granted bail and copies of the bail orders have been annexed as annexure No. 2 to the affidavit filed in support of the bail application.

¶8

A supplementary affidavit has been filed on behalf of the applicant disclosing his involvement in eight other cases mentioned in the gang chart. One case bearing Case Crime No. 65 of 2020 is under Section 4/25 Arms Act, Police Station Hapur Dehat, District Hapur and the remaining seven cases are under Section 379 IPC relating to the year 2017 and all of them have been lodged in the Police Station Mangalpuri, Delhi and it has been stated in the supplementary affidavit that the applicant has already been granted bail in all the cases. The learned Counsel for the applicant has submitted that as the applicant has been granted bail in all the predicate offences, he is entitled to be released on bail.

¶9

The learned AGA has opposed the prayer for grant of bail and he has submitted that allegations against the applicant are of serious nature.

¶10

Upon scrutinizing the facts of the case in light of the aforesaid law, what prima facie appears at this stage is that there is merely a vague accusation that the applicant is a member of a gang, without any particulars of any act committed by him. The minimum punishment which can be imposed in case of the applicant's conviction is imprisonment for two years. There is nothing on record which may indicate that the applicant is in a position to tamper with the

¶11

evidence or influence the witnesses or which may give rise to a reasonable apprehension of threat to the witnesses or to give rise to a reasonable apprehension that the applicant will abscond and will not face the trial.

¶12

The applicant has already been granted bail in all the cases in which he is involved and, therefore, larger interest of the public or the State would not be affected in case the applicant is enlarged on bail.

¶13

In view of the aforesaid discussion, the bail application is allowed.

¶14

Let the applicant – Rahul , be released on bail in Case Crime No. 631 of 2021, under Section 2/3 Uttar Pradesh Gangsters and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, Police Station Hapur Dehat, District Hapur, 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 dates 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 conditions, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move an application before this Court seeking cancellation of bail.

¶20

Order Date :- 7.12.2022 Jaswant

¶21

Digitally signed by JASWANT KUMAR Date: 2022.12.09 18:42:34 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Rahul v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rahul 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

Akhilesh Chauhan Vs State of U.P.

Sameer Vs State of U.P.

Junaid Vs State of U.P. through Secretary Home

Rajendra Patel Vs State of U.P.

Faruk Ahmad Vs State of U.P.

Sanjayj Kumar Yadav Vs State of U.P.