Allowed

Mulayam Yadav @ Surendra Yadav v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC15 Feb 2023BAIL/5256/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court granted bail to Mulayam Yadav @ Surendra Yadav in a case under the U.P. Gangster and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, subject to personal bond with sureties and specific conditions regarding court attendance and conduct.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail with personal bond and two sureties, subject to conditions including attendance and prohibition of adjournments.

Mulayam Yadav @ Surendra Yadav Vs State of U.P. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Court No. - 79

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 5256 of 2023

¶3

Applicant :- Mulayam Yadav @ Surendra Yadav Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Sanjay Kumar Pal Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Dr. Gautam Chowdhary,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA and perused the record.

¶6

The accused-applicant is involved in Case Crime No. 598 of 2022 under section 3(1) of U.P. Gangster and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, P.S.Mohammadabad, District Mau.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that one case has been shown in the Gang Chart and in which, the applicant has already been released on bail. It has also been submitted that the applicant is not involved in any antisocial activities and he has been falsely implicated. The applicant is in jail since 17.11.2022.

¶8

Learned AGA has opposed the prayer for bail but not contradicted the aforesaid fact.

¶9

Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case but without expressing any opinion on merits, let the applicant Mulayam Yadav @ Surendra Yadav be released on bail in the aforementioned case crime on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of court concerned with the following conditions:

¶10

The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence and the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law.

¶11

The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶12

In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶13

The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. If in the opinion of the trial court default of this condition is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of his bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.

¶14

Order Date :- 15.2.2023 S.Ali

¶15

Digitally signed by :- SHAUKAT ALI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Mulayam Yadav @ Surendra Yadav v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mulayam Yadav @ Surendra Yadav 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

Rajanshri Vs State of U.P.

Abhiraj Singh @ Avinash Singh Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Habib @ Pappu Vs State of U.P.

Manoj Vs State of U.P.

Tufail @ Intejar and 2 Others Vs State of U.P.

Abhishekh Kumar Rawat Vs State of U.P.