Allowed

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

Allahabad HC11 Jan 2024/370/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 370 of 2024, this Court allowed the bail application of Santosh, who was in jail since 5.11.2023. The Court found him a fit case for bail without expressing an opinion on the merits of the case under the U.P. Gangster and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986. Strict conditions were imposed including furnishing a personal bond with sureties and submit

What did the court decide?

Released on bail by furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in like amount, subject to conditions.

Santosh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:3237

¶2

Court No. - 14

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 370 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Santosh

¶5

Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home U.P. Govt. Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Amit Bhardwaj,Sudhaker Prakash Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶6

Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.

¶7

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

¶8

2. Learned counsel for accused-applicant submits that two cases have been shown against the applicant in the gang-chart and in both the cases he has been enlarged on bail. The bail orders are on record as Annexure-3 to the bail application. Apart from the cases mentioned in the gang chart, there is one more case pending against the accused applicant under the Arms Act in that case he has been enlarged on bail, a copy of which has been annexed as Annexure-4 to the bail application.

¶9

3. It has been further submitted that applicant is in jail since 5.11.2023 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.

¶10

4. 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.

¶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, Santosh involved in Case Crime No. 398 of 2023 under Section 2/3 of U.P. Gangster and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, Police Station - Kotwali Dehat, District Sitapur 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 effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses

¶17

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 Madhu

¶22

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

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

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

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

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

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

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