Allowed

Abhishek Singh @ David v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC10 Mar 2022BAIL/8796/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court allowed bail to the applicant under Section 439 Cr.P.C. in proceedings under the U.P. Gangsters Act. The Court noted that bail was granted in the applicant's only other pending case, noted jail overcrowding, and granted release on personal bond and sureties.

What did the court decide?

Release on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount on specified conditions.

Abhishek Singh @ David Vs State of U.P. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 79

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 8796 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Abhishek Singh @ David Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Ankit Kapoor Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Vikas Budhwar,J.

¶5

Supplementary Affidavit filed today is taken on record.

¶6

Heard Sri Ankit Kapoor, learned counsel for the applicant, and Sri Shrawan Kumar Ojha, learned AGA for the State.

¶7

This bail application purported to be under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C. has been moved on behalf of applicant- Abhishek Singh @ David for enlarging him on bail in Case Crime No.1 of 2022, under Sections 3(1) of U.P. Gangsters and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, registered at Police StationCholapur, District- Varanasi.

¶8

The bail application so preferred by the applicant has been rejected by the court below on 18.1.2021.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant has drawn the attention of this Court towards page-28 of the paper-book being gang chart arguing that there is a solitary case shown to be pending against the applicant, being Case Crime no. 174 of 2021, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 504, 506, 302 IPC. However, learned counsel for the applicant has also drawn the attention of this Court towards para-6 of the supplementary affidavit so as to contend that in the said case applicant has been enlarged on bail in Crl. Misc. Bail Application No.52090 of 2021 on 21.2.2022. Learned counsel for the applicant further argued that once the applicant has been enlarged on bail in the said solitary case, the invocation of the proceedings under the Gangsters Act is thoroughly impermissible, while the applicant is languishing in jail since 6.1.2022. Learned counsel for the applicant has further submitted that if the applicant is released on bail, he will

¶10

not misuse the liberty of bail, he be enlarged on bail.

¶11

Countering the said submission, the learned AGA has though opposed the bail, but he could not dispute the fact that except the said solitary case, there is no other case pending against the applicant.

¶12

Considering the submissions 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, that the applicant has been enlarged in the said solitary case and the applicant is languishing in jail since 6.1.2022, as also looking into the nature of 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.

¶13

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.

¶14

In the light of the aforenoted discussion and without making any observations on the merits of the case, the bail application is allowed.

¶15

Let the applicant- Abhishek @ David 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 :-

¶16

i) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/ pressurizing the witnesses, during the investigation or trial.

¶17

(ii) The applicant shall cooperate in the trial sincerely without seeking any adjournment.

¶18

(iii) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail.

¶19

(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.

¶20

(v) Identity, status and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted.

¶21

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.

¶22

Any observations made in granting bail to the applicant shall not in any way affect the learned Trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses.

¶23

Order Date :- 10.3.2022 N.S.Rathour

¶24

Digitally signed by NIPENDRA SINGH RATHOUR Date: 2022.03.11 12:40:21 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Abhishek Singh @ David v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Abhishek Singh @ David 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

Saheb Alam @ Doctor Alias Saheb Nut Vs State of U.P.

Monu @ Mannu Vs State of U.P.

Irfan Vs State of U.P.

Ravindra Yadav Vs State of U.P.

Sandeep Singh Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Upendra Kumar Verma Vs State of U.P.