Allowed

Mohd. Haseeb v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Allahabad HC29 May 2023/5475/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a criminal bail application under the U.P. Gangster and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, the court allowed the applicant's prayer, finding it a fit case for bail without commenting on case merits, subject to surety bonds and specific conditions.

What did the court decide?

Release on bail upon furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the prescribed amount.

Mohd. Haseeb Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC-LKO:38284

¶2

Court No. - 31

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 5475 of 2023

¶4

Applicant :- Mohd. Haseeb Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Shishir Pradhan Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Vipin Chandra Dixit,J.

¶6

Heard Sri Shishir Pradhan, learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned AGA for the State respondent and perused the record.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that three cases have been shown against the applicant in the gang-chart and in those cases, the applicant is on bail. Copies of bail orders have been annexed as Annexures-3, 4 and 5 to the affidavit filed in support of the bail application. It has also been submitted that the applicant is not involved in any antisocial activities and he has been falsely implicated in the present crime. The copy of the gang-chart has been annexed as Annexure-2 to the affidavit. It is further submitted that there is no chance of the applicant fleeing away from the judicial process or of tampering with the prosecution evidence. He next submits that the applicant is in jail since 30.12.2022 and if he is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶8

Learned AGA for the State vehemently opposed the prayer of bail. However, he does not dispute the fact that the applicant has been granted bail in the cases mentioned in the gang-chart.

¶9

Upon hearing the learned counsel for the parties and upon the perusal of the record and considering the complicity of accused, severity of punishment as well as totality of facts and circumstances, at this stage, without commenting on the merits of the case, I find it a fit case for bail. The bail application is allowed.

¶10

Let applicant- Mohd. Haseeb be released on bail in Case Crime No. 0274 of 2022, under Section 2/3 UP Gangster and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, registered at Police Station Mandhata, District Pratapgarh, on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of Court concerned, subject to the following conditions:

¶11

(i) The applicant will not tamper with prosecution evidence in any manner whatsoever.

¶12

(ii) The applicant will abide by the orders of the court, will attend the court on every date and will not delay the disposal of trial in any manner whatsoever.

¶13

(iii) The applicant will not indulge in any unlawful activity.

¶14

(iv) The applicant will not misuse the liberty of bail in any manner whatsoever.

¶15

The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by the court concerned and in case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, court concerned will be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicant to prison.

¶16

Order Date :- 29.5.2023 Kpy

¶17

Digitally signed by :- KAVLESHWAR PRASAD YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Mohd. Haseeb v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohd. Haseeb v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

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

Vivek Mishra Vs Union Of India

Boby @ Brajesh and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Ram Nath and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Dharmendra Kumar @ Sonu Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin.Secy. Home

Mohd. Husain @ Firoz Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Shiv Kumar Goswami Vs State of U.P. through its Principal Secretary Home, Civil Secretariat Lucknow