Chotey Khan Vs State of U.P. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2023)

Chotey Khan Vs State of U.P. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2023)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Applicant Chotey Khan ordered to be enlarged on bail in Case Crime No. 270 of 2023 (Sections 2/3, U.P. Gangsters and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, P.S. Puranpur, District Pilibhit) on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each of the like amount, subject to conditions (no tampering with prosecution evidence, no pressurizing of prosecution witnesses, appearance on every date fixed by the trial court), with liberty to the prosecution to seek cancellation of bail on breach.

Issue for consideration

Whether the applicant, Chotey Khan, is entitled to be enlarged on bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C. in Case Crime No. 270 of 2023 under Section 2/3 of the U.P. Gangsters and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, Police Station Puranpur, District Pilibhit, during the pendency of the trial. +1 more

Court's answer

Considering the rival submissions, the material on record and Section 19(4)(b) of the Gangsters Act, in light of counsel's submission that the applicant, while on bail, would not commit any crime/offence nor tamper with the evidence or influence the witnesses, and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court held the applicant entitled to be released on bail and allowed the bail application.

Ratio / Principle

The applicant Chotey Khan was directed to be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to the conditions that (i) he shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence, (ii) he shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses, and (iii) he shall appear on each and every date fixed by the trial court.

Key takeaways

In case of breach of any of the above bail conditions, the prosecution is at liberty to move a bail cancellation application before this Court.ratio¶18

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Allahabad High Court (Hon'ble Vivek Varma, J.) allowed a bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. filed by Chotey Khan in Case Crime No. 270 of 2023 under Section 2/3 of the U.P. Gangsters and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 (P.S. Puranpur, District Pilibhit). The gang chart showed one case against the applicant, in which he had already been enlarged on bail, and he was stated to be involved in six other cases, in all of which he had been granted bail. Learned counsel contended that the F.I.R.'s allegations of disturbing public order and gaining undue temporal, pecuniary, material or other advantage were vague, that absent allegations covered by the definitions of "gang" and "gangster" under Section 2 of the Act no F.I.R. was maintainable, that the F.I.R. rested on pending criminal cases rather than new facts seriously reflecting on society, and that the Gangsters Act could not be used as a weapon to wreak vengeance or harass citizens or to settle scores on political or other fronts. The learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer but could not satisfactorily dispute the submissions from the record. Taking note of Section 19(4)(b) of the Gangsters Act, counsel's submission that the applicant would not commit any offence while on bail nor tamper with evidence or influence witnesses, and without expressing any opinion on the merits, the Court held the applicant entitled to bail. The applicant, in jail since 03.07.2023, was to be released on a personal bond with two sureties each of the like amount, subject to conditions that he shall not tamper with prosecution evidence, shall not pressurize prosecution witnesses, and shall appear on each and every date fixed by the trial court; on breach, the prosecution was at liberty to move a bail cancellation application before the Court. Order dated 3.8.2023.

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:155322

Court No. - 74

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 34013 of 2023

Applicant :- Chotey Khan Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Atul Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

Hon'ble Vivek Varma,J.

Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned A.G.A. for the State of U.P. and perused the record.

The instant bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. has been filed with the prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 270 of 2023, under Section 2/3 of the U.P. Gangsters and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, Police Station Puranpur, District Pilibhit, during the pendency of the trial.

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 is involved in six other cases. In the said cases also he has been enlarged on bail.

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. It is next submitted that the provisions of the Gangsters 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.

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. The applicant is in jail since

03.07.2023.

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

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.

Let the applicant- Chotey Khan , 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:

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

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

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

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

Order Date :- 3.8.2023

Lbm/-

Digitally signed by :- LAL BAHADUR MAURYA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad