Allowed

Rajesh Kumar Gupta @ Rajesh Kumar @ Khanna v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko

Allahabad HC23 Oct 2024/9134/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed a bail application filed by Rajesh Kumar Gupta under the U.P. Gangster and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986. The Court released the applicant on bail with a personal bond and sureties, subject to strict conditions regarding court attendance and avoiding abuse of liberty.

What did the court decide?

The applicant is released on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two sureties in like amount with specific undertakings.

Rajesh Kumar Gupta @ Rajesh Kumar @ Khanna Vs State of… — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:71993

¶2

Court No. - 11

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 9134 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Rajesh Kumar Gupta @ Rajesh Kumar @ Khanna Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko Counsel for Applicant :- Syed Ahmad Mehdi,Naved Alam Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.

¶6

Heard Syed Ahmad Mehdi, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Pranesh Kumar Sinha, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State.

¶7

As per learned counsel for the applicant, the present applicant is languishing in jail since 16.01.2023, in Case Crime No. 91 of 2024, under Section 3(1) of U.P. Gangster and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, Police StationGosaiganj, District- Aydhya.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the present applicant has falsely been implicated in this case as he has not committed any offence as alleged in the prosecution story.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant has further submitted that against the present applicant there is one case shown in the gang chart which is annexed as Annexure No. 2 to the bail application in which the applicant has been granted bail. The bail order has been enclosed as Annexure No. 3 with this bail application. The criminal history of five other cases is duly explained in para no. 7 of the bail application. He has further submitted that the present applicant has not misused the liberty of bail so granted to him and detention of the present applicant under Gangster Act is unwarranted. He undertakes that the applicant shall not misuse the liberty of bail, if so granted by this Court, and shall abide by all terms and

¶10

conditions of the bail order and shall cooperate with the trial proceedings properly.

¶11

On the other hand, learned Additional Government Advocate has, however, opposed the prayer for bail by submitting that the involvement of the present applicant has been found in the commission of offence, therefore, he may not be enlarged on bail, but he has not disputed the aforesaid submission of learned counsel for the applicant.

¶12

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, perusing the material available on record, arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties and also considering the fact that in all the cases shown in the gang-chart the present applicant has been granted bail, the undertaking of the present applicant that he shall not misuse the liberty of bail and shall abide by all terms and conditions of bail order and without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, I am of the view that the present applicant may be released on bail. Therefore, the instant bail application is allowed.

¶13

Let the applicant- Rajesh Kumar Gupta @ Rajesh Kumar @ Khanna be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number 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:-

¶14

(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.

¶15

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

¶16

(iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of

¶17

bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicants fail 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 sufÏcient 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. The present applicant shall not leave the country without prior permission of the Court.

¶19

(Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.)

¶20

Order Date :- 23.10.2024 (Manoj K.)

¶21

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

Rajesh Kumar Gupta @ Rajesh Kumar @ Khanna v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajesh Kumar Gupta @ Rajesh Kumar @ Khanna v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home 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

Yashveer Singh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko and Another

Ram Autar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Home Civil Sectt. Lko

Mukesh Srivastava (According to Prosection But Actual Nome Mukesh Srivastav @ Gyanendra Pratap Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko.

Vinod Gawariya vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Medical Education Lko. and 2 Others

Rajesh Kumar Gupta @ Rajesh Kumar @ Khanna vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko

Rameej Nemat vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home U.P. Lko.