Allowed

Yaroslav Crivonosowa Romanov @ Shyam Sundar v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC8 Aug 2023BAIL/52652/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This interim order grants bail to an applicant facing charges under the U.P. Gangster Act. The court allowed the application on the ground of parity with other cases and concerns, noting the applicant was already on bail in three related offenses.

What did the court decide?

Release the applicant on bail subject to a personal bond and two sureties, including an Indian citizen, along with specific conditions.

Yaroslav Crivonosowa Romanov @ Shyam Sundar Vs State of U.P. — Allahabad HC (2023) — LawSathi Research

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:159483

¶2

Court No. - 75

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 52652 of 2022

¶4

Applicant :- Yaroslav Crivonosowa Romanov @ Shyam Sundar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Sudhir Kumar Agarwal, Mohd Aadil Siddiqui, Namit Srivastava, Radha Krishan Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A., Rahul Kumar Sharma

¶5

Hon'ble Pankaj Bhatia,J.

¶6

Heard Jeeshan Khan, the counsel for the applicant, the counsel for the informant as well as the learned AGA.

¶7

The accused-applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No.0204 of 2022 under section 2/3 U.P. Gangster and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 Police Station Vrindawan, District Mathura.

¶8

The FIR in question was lodged under section 2/3 of the U.P. Gangster and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 198.

¶9

The contention of the counsel for the applicant is that in the three cases shown in the Gang Chart, the applicant has been enlarged on bail in all the said three cases. The bail orders on on record. It is further argued that the co-accused (wife of the applicant) who was also similarly situated in terms of the applicant and was charged with three offences has been enlarged on bail by this court vide order dated 17.01.2023 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.52698 of 2022. It is argued that the trial although is going on but there is no likelihood of the trial being concluded in near future, thus, on the ground of parity, the applicant should be enlarged on bail. The applicant is in custody since 12.05.2022. It is further argued that the offences alleged against the applicant cannot be termed as gang activity in view of the definition of 'gang' as defined under section 2/3 of U.P. Gangster and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986.

¶10

The counsel for the informant very strongly opposes the bail application and argues that he is the informant of one of the case shown in the Gang Chart being Case Crime No.600 of 2020 wherein the allegation of the informant is that the applicant had build flats and had taken money from the informant and thus, cheated the informant of valuable security. He argues that the applicant is a foreigner and should be kept in detention centre even

¶11

if enlarged on bail as there is huge flight risk and the applicant may not cooperate with the trial. He, however, does not deny that the co-accused, wife of the applicant, charged in similar manner has been enlarged on bail.

¶12

The counsel for the applicant argues that the applicant shall cooperate with the trial and this court is duly empowered to pass orders to ensure that flight risk, as apprehended by the counsel for the informant, is taken care of.

¶13

Considering the submissions made at the bar, prima facie, the applicant was charged of committing three offences namely one in case crime no.600 of 2020 under sections 107/120-B/420/406 IPC, secondly in case crime no.575 of 2020 under sections 188, 285, 336, 506 IPC and the third case being case crime no.137 of 2022 under section 323, 353 IPC and section 14 of the Foreigner Act. It is admitted at the bar that none of the three cases have been concluded so far and in the present case also, the trial is going on. Apart from the said three cases shown in the gang chart, the applicant is involved in five other cases, out of which in three cases being case crime no.147 of 2022, case crime no.201 of 2022, case crime no.177 of 2022 the applicant is on bail. In other two cases, being case crime no.34 of 2022 and 134 of 2022, the final report has been filed in favour of the applicant and in an another case being crime no.244 of 2022, the same is subsequent to the present case in which no summons have been issued.

¶14

The only apprehension expressed by the counsel for the informant with regard to flight risk can be dealt with by this Court.

¶15

Considering the fact that the applicant is on bail in all the said three cases shown in the Gang Chart and is in custody since 12.05.2022, the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail. Thus the bail application is allowed.

¶16

Let the applicant Yaroslav Crivonosowa Romanov @ Shyam Sundar be released on bail in aforesaid first information report number subject to his furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties each of the satisfaction of the court concerned, one of which shall be an Indian Citizen with the following conditions:

¶17

(a) The applicant shall execute a bond to undertake to attend the hearings;

¶18

(b) The applicant shall not commit any offence similar to the

¶19

offence of which he is accused or suspected of the commission; and

¶20

(c) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence. 11. It is informed that the passport of the applicant is lying with the SDM Delhi as the applicant applied for the grant of citizenship which is pending. In the event the applicant need not surrender his passport but shall given an undertaking before the SDM Delhi that he shall not take back his passport and shall not flee country without leave of the trial court.

¶21

In addition to the said, the applicant shall report to the concerned Police Station every first day of quarter months i.e. January, April, July, October of each calendar year.

¶22

Order Date :- 8.8.2023 VNP/-

¶23

Digitally signed by :- VISHVANATH PRASAD SHUKLA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Yaroslav Crivonosowa Romanov @ Shyam Sundar v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Yaroslav Crivonosowa Romanov @ Shyam Sundar 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

Omkar Singh Vs State of U.P. and Another

Ranjeet Singh Vs State of U.P. and Another

Ujjendra Veer Singh Vs State of U.P. and 2OTHERS

Sunil Kumar Maurya Vs State of Up

Durga Vs State of U.P.

Riyazul Haq Vs State of U.P. and Another