Allowed

Atiq v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC17 Feb 2023BAIL/7640/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court allowed a bail application filed under the U.P. Gangster Act. The applicant, a sole breadwinner with no one to care for children, was already granted bail in two prior related cases. Considering the trial may take time and there is no evidence of misusing bail, the court ordered release.

What did the court decide?

Release of applicant on personal bond and two sureties subject to conditions against tampering with prosecution witnesses and sincere cooperation in trial.

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

¶1

Court No. - 47

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 7640 of 2023

¶3

Applicant :- Atiq Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Punita Pandey,Shweta Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Vinod Diwakar,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. on behalf of State and perused the record.

¶6

The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant, with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 141 of 2022, under Section 3 (1) of U.P. Gangster Act, Police Station Heempur (Deepa), District Bijnor, during pendency of trial.

¶7

It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. She further submits that the first case was registered against the applicant in Case Crime No. 124 of 2022, under Section 302, 201 IPC, P.S. Heempur Deepa, District Bijnor and the second case was registered against him in Case Crime No. 142 of 2019 under Sections 452, 323, 324, 325, 504 IPC, P.S. Heempur (Deepa), District Bijnor. In both the cases the applicant has been granted bail and both the cases have been registered out of prior enmity. The provisions of Gangster Act have been invoked on the basis of aforesaid two FIR's. She further submits that applicant is sole bread earner of his family and there is no one in the family to take care of the children. The applicant is languishing in jail since 06.07.2022. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in trial.

¶8

On the other hand, learned AGA has opposed the prayer for bail and submits that applicant is involved in heinous crime and therefore, the applicant is not entitled to be released on bail but learned AGA could not dispute the fact that applicant has been enlarged on bail in aforesaid two cases.

¶9

Considering that the applicant has already been enlarged on bail

¶10

on both the cases, the applicant is the only bread earner of his family; it may take some time to conclude the trial. Therefore, there is no point of keeping the applicant in jail during the pendency of the trial. Therefore, the bail application is allowed. Observation made by this court while deciding the present bail application are prima facie in nature and shall have no bearing on the trial of the case.

¶11

Let the applicant, Atiq be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified.

¶12

The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/ pressurizing the witnesses, during the trial.

¶13

The applicant shall cooperate in the trial sincerely without seeking any adjournment.

¶14

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the same shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.

¶15

Order Date :- 17.2.2023 Ujjawal

¶16

Digitally signed by :- UJJAWAL PARJAPATI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Atiq v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Atiq 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

Deepak Baisoya Vs State of U.P.

Nitin Vs State of U.P.

Deenbandhu Tiwari and Another Vs State of U.P.

Mohd Samar Vs State of U.P.

Aale Hasan Vs State of U.P.

Mohd. Sameer Vs State of U.P.