In this bail application under the U.P. Gangster Act, 1986, the applicant sought release from custody. The High Court, noting the failing trial, co-accused release, and lack of strong evidence against the applicant, granted bail with conditions.
Applicant released on bail with personal bond and two sureties subject to conditions.
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. - 78
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 9211 of 2021
Applicant :- Shahid @ Pappy Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Deepak Kumar,Mohammad Akram Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Saurabh Lavania,J.
The present bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant in Case Crime No. 552 of 2020, under Sections 3(1) U.P. Gangster and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, Police Station Nagina, District Bijnor, with the prayer to enlarge him on bail.
Submission of the learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the instant case. The applicant is languishing in jail since 16.9.2020. The trial is not proceeding and the possibility of conclusion of trial in near future is extremely bleak.
It is further submitted that in the gang chart three cases have been shown against the applicant and in all the cases he is on bail. In this regard reference has been placed on Aannexure-3 of the bail application. It is also submitted that criminal history of the applicant has been explained in para 2 of the supplementary affidavit and in all the cases mentioned therein the applicant is on bail.
He further submits that co-accused persons, namely, Altaf and Waseem Galkata have been granted bail by this Court vide orders dated 12.1.2021 and 22.1.2021 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application Nos. 1543 of 2021 and 1739 of 2021 respectively. Accordingly, the applicant is also entitled for bail. It is also submitted that there is no apprehension that after being
released on bail, he may flee from the course of law or may otherwise misuse the liberty of bail and the applicant is in jail since 16.09.2020.
He further stated that in F.I.R., in issue, the allegations with regard to disturbing the public order as also regarding gaining undue temporal, pecuniary, material or other advantage of like nature against the applicant are vague. Further, stated that in absence of allegation concerning an act or omission on the part of an accused, covered by the definition of term "gang" and "gangster" as provided under Section 2 of the Act, no FIR is maintainable. In the instant case, the FIR is based upon the pending criminal case(s) and not upon any new allegation(s) or discovery of fact(s) having serious reflection on the society, for which purpose the Act was enacted.
He also stated that the provisions of the Act could not be used as a weapon to wreak vengeance or harass or intimidate citizens or to settle scores on political or other fronts.
He stated that in this case, it appears that the District Administration in order to show good work or to win laurels or seek appreciation from the higher authorities of Government or ruling party has invoked the provisions of the Act, which is unjustified.
He also stated that considering the facts of the case, as stated above, there are reasonable grounds for believing that the applicant is not guilty of the offence under the Gangsters Act and that he would not commit the offence while on bail. He also submitted that the applicant while on bail would not commit any crime/offence nor would try to tamper the evidence or influence the witnesses in any manner whatsoever it may be.
Learned Counsel for the applicant has submitted that applicant is languishing in jail since 16.9.2020 and there is no
apprehension that, if the facility of bail is granted to the applicant, he may flee from the course of law or he will not appear before the Court below, as also the evidence/material available on record is not strong enough to raise a presumption that the applicant is guilty of the offences mentioned in the gang chart.
In these circumstances, the applicant is entitled for bail. In case of being enlarged on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in trial.
Learned A.G.A. contended that the applicant is having criminal history of 27 cases, but could not dispute the above contention made by the learned counsel for the accused-applicant as also that the co-accused persons have already been released on bail.
In response, learned counsel for the applicant reiterated the aforesaid fact that in all the cases the applicant is on bail and he is in jail since more than one and a half year, therefore, he is entitled to be released on bail.
Considering the rival submissions of learned counsel for parties, material available on record as well as totality of fact and circumstances as also the fact that co-accused persons have already been enlarged on bail by this Court and particularly taking note of the fact that the trial is not proceeding and also it is settled law that merely on the basis of pending cases the bail application is not liable to be rejected, as also after taking note of Section 19(4)(b) of the Gangsters Act in light of the facts of the case and submission of counsel for the applicant to the effect that while on bail in this case, the applicant would not commit any crime/offence nor would try to tamper the evidence or influence the witnesses in any manner whatsoever it may be and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I am of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on
bail.
Let applicant- Shahid @ Pappy be released on bail in aforesaid Case Crime, on his furnishing personal bond to the satisfaction of the court concerned forthwith. Applicant is also directed to furnish two reliable sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions:-
(1) Applicant will not try to influence the witnesses or tamper with the evidence of the case or otherwise misuse the liberty of bail.
(2) Applicant will fully cooperate in expeditious disposal of the case and shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when witnesses are present in the Court.
(3) Applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (a) opening of the case, (b) framing of charge; and (c) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C.
(4) The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad.
(5) The computer generated copy of such order shall be self attested by the counsel of the party concerned.
(6) The concerned Court/Authority/Official shall verify the authenticity of such computerized copy of the order from the official website of High Court Allahabad and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing.
Any violation of above conditions will be treated misuse of bail and learned Court below will be at liberty to pass appropriate order in the matter regarding cancellation of bail.
Considering the entirety of the case, it is directed that the trial court shall make an endeavour to conclude the trial of the
present case crime, as expeditiously as possible.
Prosecution is also directed to cooperate in the trial and produce the witnesses, as per the order(s) of the trial court.
Order Date :- 26.5.2022 M. Tarik
Digitally signed by MOHD TARIK Date: 2022.05.27 17:29:34 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the applicant is entitled to bail in a case under the U.P. Gangster and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986.
Whether the pendency of related cases allows granting bail to the applicant despite his criminal history.
Whether reasonable grounds exist to believe the applicant is not guilty and will not misuse bail.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Shahid @ Pappy
State of U.P.
Saurabh Lavania
Mohd Tarik
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
