Allowed

Sunil Singh Kansana and 2 Others v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC13 Oct 2023BAIL/43785/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single Judge Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application in a case under the U.P. Gangsters Act. The court held that the applicants are entitled to bail without expressing an opinion on the merits, subject to standard conditions preventing tampering.

What did the court decide?

Applicants released on bail on personal bond and two sureties with conditions to not tamper with evidence, pressure witnesses, and to appear on all dates.

Sunil Singh Kansana and 2 Others Vs State… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:198627

¶2

Court No. - 74

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 43785 of 2023

¶4

Applicant :- Sunil Singh Kansana And 2 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Kamlesh Kumar Dwivedi,Saurabh Dwivedi

¶5

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶6

Hon'ble Vivek Varma,J.

¶7

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

¶8

The instant bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. has been filed with the prayer to enlarge the applicants on bail in Case Crime No. 41 of 2023, under Section 2/3 of the U.P. Gangsters and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 (for short, the "Gangsters Act"), Police Station Malpura, District Agra during the pendency of the trial.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicants submits that according to the gang chart, two cases are shown against the applicant no. 1 and one case is shown against the applicant nos. 2 and 3 both, and in the said cases the applicants have 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 applicants 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 applicants are not guilty of the offence under the Gangsters Act and that they would not commit the offence while on bail nor

¶12

would try to tamper the evidence or influence the witnesses in any manner whatsoever it may be. The applicants are in jail since 27.09.2023.

¶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 applicants to the effect that while on bail in this case the applicants 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 applicants are entitled to be released on bail. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed.

¶15

Let the applicants- Sunil Singh Kansana, Shailendra and Ashok Kumar, involved in the aforesaid case, be released on bail on their 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 applicants shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence;

¶17

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

¶18

(iii) the applicants 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 :- 13.10.2023 SKT/-

¶21

Digitally signed by :- SHIVA KANT TIWARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Sunil Singh Kansana and 2 Others v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sunil Singh Kansana and 2 Others 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

Syed Imtiyaz Hussain Vs State of U.P. and Another

Raj Kashayap Vs State of U.P.

Arif .and Another Vs State of U.P.

Hari Shanker Singh @ Golu Vs State of U.P.

Narad Vs State of U.P.

Bishan Singh Vs State of U.P.