Allowed

Ravi Tiwari @ Veer Tiwari v. State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Deptt. Lucknow

Allahabad HC8 Jul 2024/5277/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bail application under Section 3(1) Gangsters Act; applicant falsely implicated per counsel, gang chart showed one case already bailed out, jail since 04.04.2022. Court found Section 19(4) condition complied with and granted bail with standard undertaking conditions.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail on furnishing personal bond and two sureties, with four conditions on attendance and conduct during trial.

Ravi Tiwari @ Veer Tiwari Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy… — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:46252

¶2

Court No. - 32

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 5277 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Ravi Tiwari @ Veer Tiwari Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Deptt. Lucknow Counsel for Applicant :- Sukh Deo Singh,Paritosh Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Brij Raj Singh,J.

¶6

1. Case is taken up through video conferencing.

¶7

2. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Rajdeep Singh learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶8

3. The present bail application has been filed by the applicant with a prayer to enlarge him on bail in Case Crime/FIR No. 83 of 2022 under Section 3(1) U.P. Gangster and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, Police Station Karaundi Kala District Sultanpur.

¶9

4. Learned counsel for the applicant contends that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the instant case. As per the gang chart, only one case has been shown against the applicant in which the applicant has been enlarged on bail, a copy of which has been annexed as Annexure no.3 to the bail application. Learned counsel for the applicant has further explained the criminal history of the applicant in para-10 of the bail application satisfactorily. Lastly, it is contended by the learned counsel for applicant that the applicant is in jail for more than two year i.e. since 04.04.2022 and the applicant is entitled for bail on the ground of incarceration.

¶10

5. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the fact that the applicant is in jail more than two years.

¶11

6. Considering the submissions of learned counsel for the parties, material available on record; contents of F.I.R.; other relevant documents; nature of offence; gang chart; the

¶12

argument that the applicant is in jail since 04.04.2024, this Court finds that condition of Section 19(4) of the Gangster Act is properly complied with, therefore, the applicant is entitled to be released on bail.

¶13

7. Accordingly, the bail application of the applicant is allowed .

¶14

8. Let the applicant, namely, Ravi Tiwari @ Veer Tiwari , be released on bail in the above case crime number on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of Court concerned with the following conditions :-

¶15

(i) 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.

¶16

(ii) 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.

¶17

(iii) 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.

¶18

(iv) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. If in the opinion of the trial court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.

¶19

It is made clear that the observations made in this order are limited to the purpose of determination of this bail application

¶20

and will in no way be construed as an expression on the merits of the case. The Trial Court shall be absolutely free to arrive at its independent conclusions on the basis of evidence led unaffected by anything in this order.

¶21

(Brij Raj Singh, J.)

¶22

Order Date :- 8.7.2024 dk/

¶23

Digitally signed by :- DEVENDRA KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Ravi Tiwari @ Veer Tiwari v. State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Deptt. Lucknow

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ravi Tiwari @ Veer Tiwari v. State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Deptt. Lucknow

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

Suraj @ Kallu Singh vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lucknow

Smt Shamim Begum vs State of Up and 2 Others

Salman Raza and Another vs State of U.P. Thru. the Prin.Secy. Home and Another

Rakesh Alias Rajesh Alias Mahant Yadav Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. Civil Sectt. Lko

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

Haarun vs Union of India (D.R.I)