Allowed

Kanhaiya v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC25 Nov 2022BAIL/53574/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This criminal bail application was allowed. The court granted bail to the applicant, Kanhaiya, under the Uttar Pradesh Gangsters and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, relying on the principle of parity as co-accused in analogous cases had already been released.

What did the court decide?

Release on bail on personal bond and sureties with conditions regarding tampering with evidence, intimidated witnesses, and appearance in court.

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

¶1

Court No. - 93

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 53574 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Kanhaiya Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Sanjay Kumar Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Surendra Singh-I,J.

¶5

Learned counsel for the applicant has supplied a copy of the orders dated 31.10.2022 and 10.11.2022 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application Nos. 47722 of 2022 and 47142 of 2022, relating to co-accused Yogendra and Dharmveer, respectively. It is taken on record.

¶6

This is an application for bail on behalf of the applicant Kanhaiya, in Case Crime No. 141 of 2022, under Section 2/3 of the Uttar Pradesh Gangsters and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, Police Station Aunchha, District Mainpuri.

¶7

Heard learned Counsel for the applicant and the learned A.G.A. appearing for the State.

¶8

The submission of the learned Counsel for the applicant is that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case on account of his involvement in three substantive offences mentioned in the gang chart, namely, Case Crime No. 103 of 2022, under Section 41/102 Cr.P.C., Section 411/413/420 I.P.C., Case Crime No. 99 of 2022, under Section 379/411 I.P.C. and Case Crime No. 100 of 2022, under Sections 379/411 I.P.C. It is next argued that the applicant has been enlarged on bail in the above-mentioned cases, copy of the bail orders whereof are annexed as annexure no. 2 to the affidavit filed in support of the bail application. It is submitted that apart from the cases mentioned in the gang chart, three more cases are registered against the applicant, which have been explained in paragraph no. 12 of the affidavit filed in support of the bail application.

¶9

It is further submitted that co-accused, Yogendra and Dharmveer, identically circumstanced as the applicant, have been enlarged on bail by different co-ordinate benches of this Court vide orders dated 31.10.2022 and 10.11.2022 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application Nos. 47722 of 2022 and 47142 of 2022, respectively, entitling the applicant to be released on bail on the ground of parity. It is in the last submitted that the applicant is in jail since 07.09.2022 and in case he is released on bail he will not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶10

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail but could not deny the submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the applicant.

¶11

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature of allegations, the gravity of the offence, the severity of punishment, the evidence appearing in the case, the fact that coaccused, Yogendra and Dharmveer, similarly situate as the applicant, have already been enlarged on bail, and taking note of Section 19(4)(b) of the Gangsters Act, but without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this Court is of opinion that the applicant is entitled to bail.

¶12

The bail application, accordingly, stands allowed .

¶13

Let the applicant, Kanhaiya , involved in the aforesaid case be released on bail on executing his personal bond and furnishing two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Court concerned with the following conditions:

¶14

i) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence. ii) The applicant shall not threaten or harass the prosecution witnesses.

¶15

iii) The applicant shall appear on the date fixed by the Trial Court.

¶16

iv) The applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which the applicant is accused, or suspected of the commission.

¶17

v) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade such person from disclosing facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶18

In case of default of any of the conditions enumerated above, the prosecution would be free to move an application for cancellation of bail before the Court concerned.

¶19

Order Date :- 25.11.2022 Brijesh Maurya

¶20

Digitally signed by BRIJESH KUMAR Date: 2022.11.25 16:56:25 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Kanhaiya v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kanhaiya 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

Anjesh Vs State of U.P.

Tarun @ Arun Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Rajesh Singh Vs State of U.P.

Ram Sarikh and Others Vs State

Saeed Akhtar @ Kalua Vs State of U.P. and Others

Sanket Mani Tiwari Vs State of U.P.