Allowed

Riyaz Ali v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. (Home), Lucknow

Allahabad HC11 Jan 2024/357/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This bail application allowed by the Allahabad High Court (Lucknow Bench). The applicant, Riyaz Ali, sought bail in a case under the U.P. Gangster and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, arguing he has no flight risks and has been in jail since November 2023. The court granted bail with sureties and strict conditions.

What did the court decide?

Bail allowed; release on personal bond and two sureties with specified conditions.

Riyaz Ali Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. (Home), Lucknow — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:3239

¶2

Court No. - 14

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 357 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Riyaz Ali Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. (Home), Lucknow Counsel for Applicant :- Anamika Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.

¶6

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

¶7

2. Learned counsel for accused-applicant submits that one case has been shown against the applicant in the gang-chart and in that case he has been enlarged on bail. The bail order is on record as Annexure-3 to the bail application. Apart from the solitary case mentioned in the gang chart, there are two more cases against the applicant, in which the applicant has been enlarged on bail. The copies of the bail orders are at page no.22 and 23 to the bail application.

¶8

3. It has been further submitted that applicant is in jail since 24.11.2023 and if bail is granted to the applicant, 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

4. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail

¶10

but has not disputed the factual submissions made by the learned counsel for the accused-applicant.

¶11

5. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, and also considering the nature of allegations, arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties, for the period for which he is in jail 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.

¶12

6. Accordingly the bail application is allowed. Let the applicant, Riyaz Ali involved in F.I.R. No. 331 of 2023 under Section 2/3 of U.P. Gangster and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, Police Station Sangipur, District Pratapgrah 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 ofÏcer or tamper with the evidence.

¶16

(iv) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the

¶17

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.

¶18

(v) The applicant shall submit an undertaking on afÏdavit 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 or misuse the liberty of bail.

¶19

(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 sufÏcient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶20

(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.

¶21

Order Date :- 11.1.2024

¶22

Madhu

¶23

Digitally signed by :- MADHU KUMARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Riyaz Ali v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. (Home), Lucknow

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Riyaz Ali v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. (Home), Lucknow

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

Pawan Rathore and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.

Jamal Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko.

Ashish Gupta Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.

Kuldeep Singh @ Kaka Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and 3 Others

Haseeb Baba Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin.Secy. Home

Santosh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home U.P. Govt. Lko.