Court allowed bail to the applicant in a case under U.P. Gangster Act, finding her a fit case considering the lack of adverse criminal history and constitutional mandate of Article 21.
Applicant released on bail upon furnishing personal bond and two sureties, subject to conditions against tampering and non-attendance.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 28
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 7148 of 2024
Applicant :- Puja Verma Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Rajesh Kumar,Suhail Kashif Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Shree Prakash Singh,J.
Order on Second Application for Bail
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Nirmal Kumar Pandey, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
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. 0006 of 2024, under Section 3(1) U.P. Gangster and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, P.S. Tikait Nagar, District Barabanki.
It is contended by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and she has been falsely implicated in the present case. He further submits that only one case has been shown in the gang chart against the applicant in which she has been enlarged on bail. Copy of the bail order has been annexed as Annexure No.3 to the bail application. He further submits that except the cases mentioned in the gang chart, there is no previous criminal antecedent of the applicant which has been explained in para 14 of the affidavit filed in support of the bail application. It has also been submitted that the applicant is not involved in any anti-social activities and she is not a member of any gang. He further submits that there is no any other criminal history of the applicant except explained aforesaid. The applicant is in jail since 29.11.2023. In case she is granted bail, she will not misuse the liberty and would cooperate in the trial proceedings.
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.
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 she is languishing in jail since 29.11.2023, thus without commenting on the merits of the case, I find it a fit case for bail.
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.
Let the applicant- Puja Verma involved in the aforementioned crime be released on bail, on her furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount, to the satisfaction of the court concerned, with the following conditions:-
(2) 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. She shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through her counsel. In case of her absence,
without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against her under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code;
(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
(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 her, in accordance with law under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.
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.
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.
Order Date :- 4.7.2024 Ram Murti
Digitally signed by :- RAM MURTI YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the applicant is a fit case for bail considering her criminal antecedents and the nature of the allegations.
Whether the conditions imposed in the bail order are appropriate to ensure fair trial and prevention of tampering with evidence.
6 provisions across 4 enactments
Puja Verma
Prakash Singh
As recorded by the court registry
2 orders share this CNR
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
