Allowed

Bablu v. State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Deptt. U.P. Govt. Lko.

Allahabad HC11 Sept 2024/9682/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a bail application filed under the U.P. Gangster and Anti Social Activities Act, the High Court considered the applicant's prior bail history and the bail granted to a co-accused. Balancing these factors against the allegations of false implication and the applicant's undertaking, the court exercised discretion to release him on bail subject to standard conditions.

What did the court decide?

Releasement of the applicant on personal bond and two sureties subject to conditions regarding court attendance, non-departure from India, and prohibition of unnecessary adjournments.

Bablu Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Deptt. U.P. Govt… — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:62778

¶2

Court No. - 4

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 9682 of 2024 Applicant :- Bablu

¶4

Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Deptt. U.P. Govt. Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Praveen Kumar Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.

¶6

Heard Sri Praveen Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Avishesh Kumar Singh, learned AGA for the State.

¶7

As per learned counsel for the applicant, the present applicant is in jail since 02.08.2024 in Case Crime No.388 of 2023, under Section 2/3 of U.P. Gangster and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, Police Station - Hasan Ganj, District - Unnao.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that against the present applicant, only two cases have been indicated in the gang chart (Annexure No.2) in which the applicant has been granted bail. The bail orders have been enclosed as Annexure No.3 to the bail application. Learned counsel has further submitted that except two cases shown in the gang chart, there is no other previous criminal history against the present applicant. Learned counsel for the applicant 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 has further submitted that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the case as he has not committed any offence as alleged. Further, co-accused Parmeshwar, having similar role, has been enlarged on bail by this Court vide order dated 03.05.2024 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.4807 of 2024, therefore, on the basis of principles of parity, the present applicant may also be enlarged on bail. Further, the applicant undertakes that he shall not misuse the liberty of bail, if so granted by this Court and shall abide by all terms and conditions of the bail order and shall cooperate in the trial proceedings.

¶9

Learned A.G.A. has, however, opposed the prayer for bail but he could not dispute the aforesaid submissions of learned counsel for the applicant.

¶10

Without entering into merits of the issue; considering the arguments of learned counsel for the parties; contents and allegations of the FIR; the fact that two cases have been shown against the present applicant in the gang-chart in which he has

¶11

been granted bail; except two cases shown in the gang chart, there is no other previous criminal history against the present applicant; co-accused Parmeshwar, having similar role, has been enlarged on bail by this Court and undertaking of the applicant that he shall cooperate in the trial proceedings and shall not misuse the liberty of bail, I find it appropriate to release the applicant on bail.

¶12

Accordingly, the bail application is allowed .

¶13

Let applicant- Bablu 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 sufficient 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 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.

¶17

(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.

¶18

(v) The applicant shall not leave India without previous permission of the court.

¶19

[Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.]

¶20

Order Date :- 11.9.2024 /RBS/-

¶21

Digitally signed by :- RAM BIR SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Bablu v. State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Deptt. U.P. Govt. Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bablu v. State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Deptt. 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

Balak Ram Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Forest Deptt. and Another

Ram Baran Yadav Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Forest Deptt. Secy. Lko. and 3 Others

Prem Kumar Kuril and Another Vs State of U.P. Thru. Its Addl. Chief Secy. Irrigation Deptt. Lko and 2 Others

P.K. Dutta vs C.B.I./a.C.B. Lucknow

Krishna Kumar Mishra vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Revenue Deptt. Lko and 3 Others

Dr. Ashok Kumar Mishra and 21 Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Finance and 3 Others