Allowed

Umashankar Yadav @ Bander v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin.Secy. Deptt. of Home

Allahabad HC10 Apr 2024/2729/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed a bail application filed by an accused charged under the U.P. Gangster and Anti-Social Activities Act. The applicant sought parity with co-accused who were released on bail in other pending cases. The Court granted bail imposing restrictive conditions under the Act and IPC, including surrender on summons.

What did the court decide?

The applicant was enlarged on bail conditioned by a personal bond and two sureties, with specific undertakings under Section 229-A IPC and Section 19(4) of the U.P. Gangster and Anti-Social Activities

Umashankar Yadav @ Bander Vs State of U.P. Thru… — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:29371

¶2

Court No. - 15

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 2729 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Umashankar Yadav @ Bander Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin.Secy. Deptt. Of Home Counsel for Applicant :- Satyendra Nath Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.

¶6

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

¶7

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. In the cases mentioned in the gang chart, he has been released on bail. The bail orders are on record. Apart from the cases mentioned in the gang chart, there is no other case pending against the accused applicant. He further submits that co-accused Sandeep Kumar Yadav & Mahesh Yadav have been granted bail by Co-ordinate Bench of this Court as well as by this Court vide orders dated 04.01.2024 & 20.02.2024 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.15400 of 2023 & 1875 of 2024 respectively. Applicant seeks parity with the bail orders of aforesaid co-accused persons.

¶8

It has been further submitted that applicant is in jail since 20.12.2023 and if facility of bail is granted, there is no apprehension that he will flee from the judicial process and he will abide by the orders passed by the Court below and will cooperate in speedy trial of the case.

¶9

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail but has not disputed the factual submissions made by the learned counsel for the accused-applicant.

¶10

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, and also considering the nature of allegations, arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties and the fact that applicant has been enlarged on bail in five cases shown in the gang chart, there is no other criminal history of applicant; applicant is in jail since 20.12.2023 as also the fact that applicant seeks parity with the bail order of co-accused Sandeep Kumar Yadav & Mahesh Yadav (supra) and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case for enlarging the applicant on bail.

¶11

Accordingly, the bail application is allowed on the grounds of parity.

¶12

Let the applicant, Umashankar Yadav @ Bander involved in Case Crime No.234 of 2023, under Sections 2/3(1) of U.P. Gangster and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, Police Station - Munshiganj District - Amethi 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 with the following conditions which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-

¶13

(i) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.

¶14

(ii) The applicant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.

¶15

(iii) 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.

¶16

(iv) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law. (v) The applicant shall submit an undertaking on affidavit in terms of Section 19 (4) of the U.P. Gangster and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 that he will not indulge in any case for or misuse the liberty of bail.

¶17

(vi) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶18

(vii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶19

Order Date :- 10.4.2024 Saurabh Yadav/-

¶20

Digitally signed by :- SAURABH YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Umashankar Yadav @ Bander v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin.Secy. Deptt. of Home

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Umashankar Yadav @ Bander v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin.Secy. Deptt. of Home

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

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Thakur Ajay Singh Alias Ajay Singh Alias Golu Singh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Pooja Bhatnagar Vs Sandeep Srivastava

Smt. Sabiha Khatoon Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko. U.P. and Another

Rajendra Rawat Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home, Lko.

Nagina Singh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Sectt. Lko

Shivam Kumar @ Ashutosh Kumar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko and 3 Others