Allowed

Abhishek Saroj v. State of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Home Civil Secrt. Lko.

Allahabad HC19 Feb 2024/1642/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single judge allowed bail application under U.P. Gangsters Act. Applicant argued false implication and co-accused bail grants. Court noted no challenge to trial court bail orders and imposed standard conditions.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail with personal bond and two sureties subject to conditions regarding non-tampering, sincere cooperation, and no criminal activity.

Abhishek Saroj Vs State of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt… — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:14534

¶2

Court No. - 15

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 1642 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Abhishek Saroj Opposite Party :- State Of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Home Civil Secrt. Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Ravindra Kumar Dwivedi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Mohd. Faiz Alam Khan,J.

¶6

Learned A.G.A. informs that he has procured complete instructions in the matter including upto date case diary.

¶7

Supplementary affidavit, filed on behalf of the applicant, is taken on record.

¶8

Heard learned counsel for the accused-applicant as well as learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶9

This bail application has been moved on behalf of the applicant- Abhishek Saroj for grant of bail, in Case Crime No.0134 of 2023, under Section 2/3(1) of the U.P. Gangsters and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, Police Station Jagdishpur, District Amethi, during pendency of trial.

¶10

Learned counsel for accused-applicant while pressing the bail application submits that the accused-applicant has been falsely implicated in the instant case as well as in the five cases mentioned in the gang chart and he has not committed any offence, as claimed by the prosecution.

¶11

It is further submitted that in the five cases mentioned in the gang chart the applicant has been released on bail by the trial court and bail orders with regard to these five cases have been placed on record collectively as Annexure No.3 to this bail application and apart from those five cases mentioned in the gang chart, the complicity of the applicant is also shown with regard to another criminal case, however, in that case also, he has been granted bail by trial court which has been explained in the supplementary affidavit filed today and, apart from the above mentioned cases, the applicant is not involved in any other criminal case.

¶12

It is also submitted that the applicant is in jail in this matter since 03.01.2023 and only on the basis of five criminal cases, the provisions of Gangster Act have been invoked against the applicant and the material which has been made the basis of

¶13

lodging the first information report in this case is not sufficient enough to raise a presumption that the applicant is either guilty of the offences mentioned in the gang chart or may commit the same offences again if the facility of bail is granted to him. It is further submitted that co-accused persons, namely, Ram Chandra Yadav, Ramu Saroj and Suraj Kumar Yadav have been enlarged on bail by this Court vide orders passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application Nos. 12158 of 2023, 9779 of 2023 and 9295 of 2023.

¶14

Learned A.G.A. opposes the prayer for bail of the applicant, but could not confront the factual submissions made by the learned counsel for the accused-applicant.

¶15

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having perused the record, it is evident that the provisions of Gangsters Act has been invoked against the applicant on the basis of five cases mentioned in the gang chart, however, in the cases mentioned in the gang chart he has been released on bail by trial court and apart from the above mentioned cases, the complicity of the applicant is stated to be shown in another criminal case, wherein also he has been granted bail by trial court and apart from the above mentioned cases, the applicant is not involved in any other criminal case. The applicant is in jail in this case since 03.01.2023. Nothing has been brought on record, which may suggest that the facility of bail granted by trial court pertaining to the offences mentioned in the gang chart has been challenged at any higher forum or has been cancelled by any superior court. The presence of the applicant could be secured before the trial court by placing adequate conditions/restrictions. Co-accused persons, namely, Ram Chandra Yadav, Ramu Saroj and Suraj Kumar Yadav have already been enlarged on bail by this Court.

¶16

Having regard to the overall facts and circumstances of the case and keeping in view the submissions made by learned counsel for the applicant I find substance only for the purpose of releasing the applicant on bail. The bail application is, thus, allowed .

¶17

Let the applicant - Abhishek Saroj involved in the aforesaid case be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions:-

¶18

(i) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/pressurizing the witnesses, during the investigation or trial.

¶19

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

¶20

(iii) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail.

¶21

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

¶22

Identity, status and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted.

¶23

Observations made herein-above by this court are only for the purpose of disposal of this bail application and shall not be construed as an expression of this Court on the merits of the case.

¶24

Order Date :- 19.2.2024 MVS/-

¶25

Digitally signed by :- MANOJ VIKRAM SINGH CHAUHAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Abhishek Saroj v. State of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Home Civil Secrt. Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Abhishek Saroj v. State of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Home Civil Secrt. Lko.

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

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Manorama Devi Thru. Her Husband Chandra Pratap Patel Vs State of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Secrt. Lko. and 3 Others

Kanhaiyalal Yadav @ Kanhiya Lal Vs State of U.P Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. Home Civil Secrt. Lko.

Pappu and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. /Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Baijnath Tiwari Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin.Secy. Home Deptt. Lko

Madan Mohan Yadav @ Madan Mohan @ Dablu and Another Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Mustkim Vs State of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Civil Secrt. Lko.