Allowed

Kallu Quaraishi v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC6 Sept 2023BAIL/39254/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Allahabad High Court allowed a criminal miscellaneous bail application filed under the U.P. Gangsters and Anti Social Activities Prevention Act, 1986. The court granted bail based on Section 19(4)(b), noting vague FIR allegations against the applicant and absence of new facts reflecting on society. The applicant was directed to furnish a personal bond and two sureties.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail on furnishing personal bond and two sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned.

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

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:175452

¶2

Court No. - 75

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 39254 of 2023

¶4

Applicant :- Kallu Quaraishi Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Babul Kumar Sharma Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Umesh Chandra Sharma,J.

¶6

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

¶7

The instant bail application has been filed with the prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 279 of 2022, under Section 2/3 of the U.P. Gangsters and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, Police Station Hawabad, District Jhansi, during the pendency of the trial.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant submits 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.

¶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 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.

¶10

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

¶11

to tamper the evidence or influence the witnesses in any manner whatsoever it may be. The applicant is in jail since 19.09.2022.

¶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- Kallu Quaraishi 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:

¶15

(i) the applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence; (ii) the applicant shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses; and,

¶16

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

¶17

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

¶18

Order Date :- 6.9.2023 S.Verma

¶19

Digitally signed by :- SANDEEP KUMAR VERMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Kallu Quaraishi v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kallu Quaraishi 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Zalil Ahmad Vs State of U.P.

Dinesh Chand Vs State of U.P. and Others

Sageer Ahmad Alias Babbu Vs Smt Tarranum

Sanjeev Alias Guddu Vs State of U.P.

Arjun Singh Vs State of U.P.

Harendra @ Kallu Vs State of U.P.