Allowed

Monu @ Suraj v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC23 Aug 2023BAIL/27702/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Judicature at Allahabad allowed a bail application filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. The court noted vague allegations regarding public order and the definition of a 'gang' under the U.P. Gangsters Act. The applicant was released on a personal bond and two sureties. No other opinion on the merits was expressed.

What did the court decide?

The applicant was released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties, subject to specific conditions regarding conduct and appearance in court.

Monu @ Suraj Vs State of U.P. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:170110

¶2

Court No. - 74

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 27702 of 2023

¶4

Applicant :- Monu @ Suraj Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Raghubir Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Vivek Varma,J.

¶6

Rejoinder affidavit to the counter affidavit filed by the State is taken on record.

¶7

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

¶8

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. 92 of 2023, under Section 2/3 of the U.P. Gangsters and Antisocial Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, Police StationFatehpur Sikari, District- Agra, during the pendency of trial.

¶9

Counsel for the applicant contends that on 23.06.2023, the applicant was granted interim bail by this Court. The said interim bail has not misused by him. It is next contended that according to the gang chart, three cases are shown against the applicant and in the said cases the applicant has been enlarged on bail.

¶10

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 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

¶12

whatsoever it may be. The applicant is in jail since 26.05.2023.

¶13

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

¶14

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.

¶15

Let the applicant- Monu @ Suraj , involved in the aforesaid case, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of court concerned on the following conditions that:

¶16

(i) the applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence;

¶17

(ii) the applicant shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses; and,

¶18

(iii) the applicant shall appear on each and every date fixed by the trial court.

¶19

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

¶20

Order Date :- 23.8.2023 Sachin Mishra

¶21

Digitally signed by :- SACHIN MISHRA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Monu @ Suraj v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Monu @ Suraj 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

Insar Ali Vs State of U.P.

Manoj Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Ajay and Another Vs State of U.P.

Kamu Kuraishi Vs State of U.P.

Ankur Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Rajendra Singh Vs State of U.P.