Allowed

Vikas Balmiki v. State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.

Allahabad HC5 Jul 2024/7058/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court granted bail to Vikas Balmiki in a gangster prevention case. The applicant had prior bail history but no undisclosed criminal antecedents. Being in jail since April 2021, he was found to be in a fit case for bail.

What did the court decide?

The applicant Vikas Balmiki was released on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two sureties with specific conditions to appear in court and not tamper with evidence.

Vikas Balmiki Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:45984

¶2

Court No. - 28

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 7058 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Vikas Balmiki Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Shailendra Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Shree Prakash Singh,J.

¶6

Supplementary affidavit filed today is taken on record.

¶7

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Atreya Tripathi, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶8

The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant with a prayer to release the applicant on bail during the trial in Case Crime No. 0123 of 2022, under Section 3(1) U.P. Gangster and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 P.S.Deva, District Barabanki.

¶9

It is contended by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the present case. He further submits that two cases have been shown in the gang chart against the applicant in which he has been enlarged on bail. Copy of the bail orders have been annexed as Annexure No.3 to the bail application. He further submits that except the cases mentioned in the gang chart, there is thirteen cases criminal history which are explained in para 10 of the affidavit filed in support of the bail application. Further three cases criminal history are explained in para 3 of the supplementary affidavit. It has also been submitted that the applicant is not involved in any anti-social activities and he is not a member of any gang. He further submits that there is no any other criminal history of the applicant except explained

¶10

aforesaid. The applicant is in jail since 22.4.2021. In case he is granted bail, he will not misuse the liberty and would cooperate in the trial proceedings.

¶11

Per contra, learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer of bail but he could not dispute the fact that the applicant has been enlarged on bail and there is no any other criminal history of the applicant except explained aforesaid.

¶12

Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and after perusal of record, I find that applicant has been enlarged on bail in the cases mentioned in the gang chart and there is no other criminal antecedents except explained aforesaid, coupled with the fact that he is languishing in jail since 22.4.2021, thus without commenting on the merits of the case, I find it a fit case for bail.

¶13

Considering the submissions of learned counsel of both sides, nature of accusation and severity of punishment in case of conviction, nature of supporting evidence, prima facie satisfaction of the Court in support of the charge, reformative theory of punishment and considering larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India and, without expressing any view on the merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case of bail.

¶14

Let the applicant- Vikas Balmiki involved in the aforementioned crime 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:-

¶15

The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/ pressurizing the witnesses, or otherwise during the investigation or trial;

¶16

(2) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he

¶17

shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. He 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

(3) 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.; and

¶19

(4) 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, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶20

The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by the court concerned and in case of breach of any of the above conditions, the court below shall be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicant to prison.

¶21

It is clarified that the observations made in this order are strictly confined to the disposal of this bail application and must not be construed to have any reflection on the merits of the case.

¶22

Order Date :- 5.7.2024 Ram Murti

¶23

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

Vikas Balmiki v. State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vikas Balmiki v. State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Deptt. 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

Anand Kumar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 5 Others

Puja Verma Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Aryan Singh vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Aman Yadav Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.

Shiva Kant Dwivedi vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Prin. Secy. Secondary Education Lko. and 5 Others

Raju Rai vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home U.P. Lko.