Single judge allowed the bail application of Samruddin in a case under the U.P. Gangster Act, 1986, citing pandemic-related jail overcrowding and noting the applicant was already on bail in another case.
Release of the applicant on bail via personal bond and two sureties with standard conditions and verification of documents.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 92
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 55435 of 2021
Applicant :- Samruddin Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Through Secretary Home At Lucknow Counsel for Applicant :- Saksham Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Vikas Budhwar,J.
Heard Sri Saksham Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicant, and Sri A.K. Shukla, learned AGA for the State.
This bail application purported to be under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C. has been moved for seeking bail in Case Crime No. 101 of 2021 under Section 3(1) of U.P. Gangster and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act. 1986, registered at Police Station Raipur, District- Sonbhadra.
The bail application of the applicant has been rejected by the court below, on 25.11.2021.
The learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the FIR was got registered by Incharge Inspector Vinod Kumar Sonkar on 23.10.2021 before Police Station Raipur, Sonbhadra being FIR No. 0101 at 22:10 hours against the applicant and eight others. Learned counsel for the applicant has drawn the attention of the court towards page no. 19 of the bail application being the gang chart wherein only one case has been shown to be pending against the applicant being case crime no. 74/2020, u/s 307, 120-B IPC and section 3/5A/8 Cow Slaughter Act and section 11 Animal Cruelty Act. The learned counsel for the applicant has further drawn the attention of the court towards page no. 24 of the bail application so as to contend that the applicant has been enlarged on bail by the court below on 22.12.2020. He next argued that the applicant is languishing in jail since 26.10.2021.
Countering the said submission learned AGA for the State has opposed the bail while arguing that the applicant has criminal history of one case but he could not dispute the fact that he is enlarged on bail in that case by the court below on 22.12.2020.
Considering the submission so advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, on the question of bail, prima facie this Court finds that this is a fit case for grant of bail, looking into the nature of the acquisition, the evidence collected by the I.O. in support of the charge, gravity of offence, nature and severity of the punishment in the case of conviction, complicity of accused and all attending circumstances.
Courts have taken notice of the overcrowding of jails during the current pandemic situation (Ref.: Suo Motu Writ Petition (c) No. 1/2020, Contagion of COVID 19 Virus in prisons before the Supreme Court of India). These circumstances shall also be factored in while considering bail applications on behalf of accused persons.
In the light of the aforenoted discussion and without making any observations on the merits of the case, the bail application is allowed.
Let the applicant Samruddin involved in aforesaid crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions that :-
(i). The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/ pressurizing the witnesses, during the investigation or trial.
(ii). The applicant shall cooperate in the trial sincerely without seeking any adjournment.
(iii). The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail.
(iv). 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 him from disclosing such facts to the Court to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.
(v). In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.
(vi). Identity, status and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted.
Taking into consideration that Covid-19 is continuing and due to which certified copy would not be possible to be obtained by the applicant, therefore, if a copy of this order downloaded from the official website of Allahabad High Court and self attested by the counsel for the applicant is placed before the Court, the same would be entertained.
Order Date :- 11.2.2022
Nisha
Digitally signed by NISHA KUMARI Date: 2022.02.22 19:08:54 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
2 issues framed by the court
Whether bail ought to be granted in respect of an offence under the U.P. Gangster and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 considering the applicant has already been granted bail in another c
Whether overcrowding in jails during the pandemic situation is a relevant factor to consider for granting bail.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Contagion of COVID 19 Virus in prisonsReferred¶11
Suo Motu Writ Petition (c) No. 1/2020
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Samruddin
State Of U.P. Through Secretary Home At Lucknow
Vikas Budhwar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
