Allowed

Shakir Ali v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC21 Nov 2023BAIL/10964/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed a bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. filed under the U.P. Gangsters Act. The court held that the applicant was entitled to bail on personal bond and sureties, subject to conditions preventing tampering with evidence or witnesses, noting the State could not satisfactorily dispute the applicant's submissions.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail on personal bond and two heavy sureties, subject to conditions of appearing in court and not tampering with evidence or witnesses.

Shakir Ali Vs State of U.P. — Narcotics (NDPS) | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:221016

¶2

Court No. - 74

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 10964 of 2023

¶4

Applicant :- Shakir Ali Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Rayoof Ali Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Vivek Varma,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State-opposite party and perused the record.

¶7

The instant bail application, under Section 439 Cr.P.C., has been filed with a prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail in Case Crime No.277 of 2022, under Section 3(1) of the U.P. Gangsters and Antisocial Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, Police Station- Nagar, District- Basti, during the pendency of trial.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that according to the gang chart, one case is shown against the applicant and in the said case the applicant has been enlarged on bail. It is next contended that apart from the case mentioned in the gang chart, the applicant was involved in six cases. In the said cases also he has been enlarged on bail. It is next contended that the applicant is in jail since 09.07.2023. The trial is moving at a snail's pace, and is not likely to conclude early. The applicant is not responsible for the delay in the trial. It is further contended that the inordinate delay in concluding the trial has led to virtually an indefinite imprisonment of the applicant without there being any credible evidence to implicate him in the offence and violates the rights of the applicant to a speedy trial

¶9

He further submits that in the 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. In absence of allegation concerning an act or omission on the part of an accused, covered by the definition of terms "gang" and "gangster" as provided under Section 2 of the Gangsters Act, no F.I.R. is maintainable. In the instant case, the F.I.R. is based upon the pending criminal cases and not upon any new allegations or discovery of facts having

¶10

serious reflection on the society, for which purpose the Gangsters Act was enacted.

¶11

It is also submitted 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 nor would try to tamper the evidence or influence the witnesses in any manner whatsoever it may be.

¶12

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail but could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions from the record.

¶13

Considering the rival submissions of learned counsel for parties, material available on record as well as taking note of Section 19(4) (b) of the Gangsters Act, in light of the 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. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed.

¶14

Let the applicant- Shakir Ali , involved in the aforesaid case be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two heavy sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to conditions that he:

¶15

(i) shall appear on the date fixed by the trial court;

¶16

(ii) shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence;and,

¶17

(iii) shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses;

¶18

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move bail cancellation application before this Court.

¶19

Order Date :- 21.11.2023 Imtiyaz

¶20

Digitally signed by :- IMTIYAZ AHMAD High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Shakir Ali v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shakir Ali 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

Prabal Pratap @ Sonu Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Navjeet Singh Vs State of U.P.

Smt Reeta Singh Vs State of U.P.

Wajid Vs State of U.P.

Savare Aalam Vs State of U.P.

Ashwani Kumar Sharma Vs State of U.P.