Allowed

Salman v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC13 Feb 2023BAIL/5894/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 5894 of 2023, the Allahabad High Court allowed bail to the applicant, Salman, challenging his detention under the U.P. Gangster and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986. The court relied on the non-receipt of police instructions due to official apathy rather than merits.

What did the court decide?

Release on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two sureties, subject to standard bail conditions.

Salman Vs State of U.P. — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Court No. - 74

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 5894 of 2023

¶3

Applicant :- Salman Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Amit Rai Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Ajay Bhanot,J.

¶5

By means of the bail application, the applicant has prayed to be enlarged on bail in Case Crime No.227 of 2022 at Police Station-Najibabad, District-Bijnor under Section 3(1) of the U.P. Gangster and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986. The applicant is in jail since 28.04.2022.

¶6

The bail application of the applicant was rejected by the learned trial court on 24.08.2022.

¶7

The following arguments made by Shri Amit Rai, learned counsel on behalf of the applicant, which could not be satisfactorily refuted by Shri Paritosh Kumar Malviya, learned AGA-I for the State from the record, entitle the applicant for grant of bail:

¶8

(1). The applicant has been falsely implicated in this case only to burnish the credentials of the police authorities.

¶9

(2). The applicant has been enlarged on bail in the two criminal cases depicted in the gang chart. He is not a member of any criminal gang.

¶10

(3). The applicant does not have any criminal history apart from the instant case.

¶11

(4). The applicant is not a flight risk. The applicant being a law abiding citizen has always cooperated with the investigation and undertakes to cooperate with the court proceedings. There is no possibility of his influencing witnesses, tampering with the evidence or reoffending.

¶12

Shri Paritosh Kumar Malviya, learned AGA-I contends that no instructions have been forthcoming.

¶13

Liberty of citizens is too sacrosanct and cannot be held to ransom by apathy of the police officials. There is no cause for failing to provide instructions to the learned Government Advocate despite advance notice of the bail application.

¶14

The Superintendent of Police, Bijnor shall take appropriate action against the erring police officials for failing to send appropriate instructions to the learned Additional Government Advocate despite advance notice of bail application and violating the directions of this Court in Sahil Vs. State of U.P. (Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 19839 of 2021) as well as in Aditya Dubey alias Sachin Vs. State of U.P. (Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 17969 of

¶15

and the consequential orders passed by the Director General of Police, Government of U.P, Lucknow. In the light of the preceding discussion and without making any observations on the merits of the case, the bail application is allowed.

¶16

Let the applicant-Salman be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number, on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court below. The following conditions be imposed in the interest of justice:-

¶17

(i) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence or influence any witness during the trial.

¶18

(ii) The applicant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted.

¶19

Order Date :- 13.2.2023 Ashish Tripathi

¶20

Digitally signed by :- ASHISH NAYAN TRIPATHI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Salman v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Salman 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ram Karan Vs State of U.P through Its Principal Secretary (Home) at Lko.

Rajkumar @ Chhotu Vs State of U.P.

Ammu Vs State of U.P.

Ajay Rao Vs State of U.P.

Lalit Rajbhar Vs State of U.P.

Bhanu Pratap @ Rajesh Vs State of U.P.