Allowed

Brijesh Kumar Bind @ Kaptan v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC12 Sept 2023BAIL/22270/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

issued bail order provisions Gangster Prevention Act despite invocaton admits applicant already on bail case else no material shows he fits definition of gangster; granted bail conditions.

What did the court decide?

released on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each subject to seven specific conditions.

What the court decided

Brijesh Kumar Bind @ Kaptan Vs State of U.P. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:177162

¶2

Court No. - 76

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 22270 of 2023 Applicant :- Brijesh Kumar Bind @ Kaptan Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Ramesh Kumar Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Vikram D. Chauhan,J.

¶5

Learned A.G.A. submits that instructions have been received and has no objection in case the bail application is heard on merits. 2. Heard learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record with the assistance of learned A.G.A.

¶6

It is submitted by learned A.G.A. that there is one case shown in the gang chart against applicant, in which case he is already on bail, the bail order is annexed as Annexure no. 3 to the affidavit. Applicant is languishing in jail since 31.12.2022.

¶7

It is evident that the provision of Gangster Act has been invoked against the applicant on the basis of one criminal case. However, applicant has been released on bail in the aforesaid cases. Learned A.G.A. has not produced any material to demonstrate that the applicant comes within the definition of "Gangster" and "Gang" under U.P. Gangsters and Antisocial Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986. Mere pendency of criminal case may not ipso facto invoke provisions of U.P. Act No.7 of 1986. Criminal history of the applicant has been adequately explained.

¶8

The applicant in the present case has been implicated on the basis of the criminal case detailed in the gang chart. It is not in dispute by learned A.G.A. that the applicant has already been enlarged on bail in the criminal case showing in the gang chart. Once the applicant has been enlarged on bail in previous criminal case shown in the gang chart which forms the foundation for lodging of the criminal case under the Gangster Act. This Court see no valid ground to detain the applicant in custody once the applicant has already been enlarged on bail in the case shown in the gang chart.

¶9

Learned A.G.A. has not shown any other criminal history of the applicant.

¶10

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, nature of offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, submissions of learned counsel for the parties and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed.

¶11

Let the applicant Brijesh Kumar Bind @ Kaptan involved in Case Crime No. 51 of 2023, under Sections 3(1) of U.P. Gangster and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, Police Station Sujanganj, District Jaunpur, be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to the following conditions:-

¶12

i. The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.

¶13

ii. The applicant will not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witness.

¶14

iii. The applicant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted and/ or the applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required.

¶15

iv. The applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which he is accused, or suspected, of the commission of which he is suspected.

¶16

v. 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 or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶17

vi. The applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court.

¶18

vii. In the event, the applicant changes his residential address, the applicant shall inform the court concerned about new residential address in writing.

¶19

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

¶20

Order Date :- 12.9.2023 S.Prakash

¶21

Digitally signed by :- SHASHI PRAKASH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Brijesh Kumar Bind @ Kaptan v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Brijesh Kumar Bind @ Kaptan 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

Kishore Yadav and Another Vs State of U.P.

Museer Vs State of U.P.

Mubarik @ Kaka Vs State of U.P.

Kallu Gurjar Vs State of U.P.

Sajid @ Kala Vs State of U.P.

Naushad Vs State of U.P.