Single judge allowed bail to Mayank Singh in a trial case under the Arms Act, considering the charge sheet was submitted, criminal history explained, and no apprehension of flight.
Applicant released on bail on furnishing a personal bond with two sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:14911
Court No. - 15
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 1635 of 2024
Applicant :- Mayank Singh Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Anil Kumar Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Mohd. Faiz Alam Khan,J.
the applicant in Case Crime No. 7/2020 he was not having any criminal antecedent. There is no apprehension that the accusedapplicant after release on bail, may flee from the process of law or may otherwise misuse the liberty.
(i) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/pressurizing the witnesses, during the investigation or trial.
(ii) The applicant shall cooperate in the trial sincerely without seeking any adjournment.
(iii) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail.
Order Date :- 20.2.2024 Muk
Digitally signed by :- MOHD UMAR KHAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench
2 issues framed by the court
Whether a person accused of committing heinous offences under the Arms Act is entitled to bail when the charge sheet is submitted and criminal history adequately explained.
Whether the applicant has made out a safety to his person against arrest.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Mayank Singh
State Of U.P.
Mohd. Faiz Alam Khan
As recorded by the court registry
3 orders share this CNR
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
