Sachchidanand Tiwari Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Civil Sectt. Govt. Lko

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:84619

Court No. - 27

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 12913 of 2024

Applicant :- Sachchidanand Tiwari Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Civil Sectt. Govt. Lko Counsel for Applicant :- Anil Kumar Tiwari Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Mohd. Faiz Alam Khan,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the accused-applicant as well as learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶7

Learned A.G.A. informs that he has procured complete instructions in the matter, including upto date case diary and charge-sheet in this case has been filed.

¶8

This bail application has been moved by the accused/applicant- Sachchidanand Tiwari for grant of bail in Case Crime No.0332 of 2018, under section 2/3 U.P. Gangster and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 lodge at police station Jaisinghpur, district Sultanpur, during trial.

¶9

Learned counsel for accused-applicant while pressing the bail application submits that the accused-applicant has been falsely implicated in the instant case as well as in the single case mentioned in the gang chart, however, in the single case, on the basis of which the provisions of the Gangsters Act have been invoked against the applicant, he has been released on bail by a coordinate bench of this court vide order dated 22.11.2024 passed in criminal misc. bail application no.10215 of 2023. It is further submitted that co-accused persons, namely, Ravinand Tiwari, Chandan Tiwari @ Ramakant Tiwari and Suryakant Tiwari @ Bhullur have been enlarged on bail by this court vide orders dated 28.01.2019, 07.01.2029 and 07.01.2029 passed in Bail Nos.1042 of 2019, 172 of 2019 and 119 of 2019, copies of which have been placed on record as Annexures 13, 14 and 15 respectively to the affidavit enclosed with the bail application.

¶10

It is further submitted that criminal history of 18 cases is being alleged against the applicant, however, one of such case is pertaining to case crime no. 179 of 1981 under section 307 IPC in which he has been acquitted by the competent criminal court and there are 7 cases with regard to sections 107/116 and

¶11

the same have elapsed by efflux of time, while one case bearing crime no.0138/1991 was resulted in acquittal and in other cases he has been enlarged on bail by the competent criminal court and all the criminal history has been explained in para-8 of the affidavit enclosed with the bail application.

¶12

It is further submitted that since all the criminal history of the applicant has been explained adequately and the prosecution has also chosen to consider only one case for the purpose of invocation of provisions of the Gangsters Act and, thus, the criminal history of the applicant would not be having any adverse affect on the fate of the instant bail application as in all these cases the applicant has either been acquitted by the competent criminal courts or has been enlarged on bail. It is further submitted that the material which has been collected by the informant in order to lodge the FIR of the instant case is not sufficient enough to raise any presumption that either the applicant is guilty of the offence or would commit the same offence again, if facility of bail is granted to him and there is no apprehension that after being released on bail, he may flee from the course of law or may otherwise misuse the liberty.

¶13

Learned AGA, however, opposes the prayer of bail of the applicant.

¶14

Keeping in view the fact that the prosecution has considered only one criminal case against the applicant in order to invoke the provisions of the Gangsters Act wherein he has been enlarged on bail by a coordinate bench of of this court and there is nothing on record which may suggest that the order whereby the bail was granted to the applicant has been challenged at any higher forum or has been cancelled by the same court and also keeping in view that the criminal history of the applicant has been explained adequately and in all these cases either he has been released on bail or has been acquitted by the competent criminal court, in the considered opinion of this courts, a case of bail is made out in favour of the applicant.

¶15

Thus, the instant bail application is allowed .

¶16

Let the applicant/ Sachchidanand Tiwari involved in the aforesaid case be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions:-

¶17

(i) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/pressurizing the witnesses, during the investigation or trial.

¶18

(ii) The applicant shall cooperate in the trial sincerely without seeking any adjournment.

¶19

(iii) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail.

¶20

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.

¶21

Identity, status and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted.

¶22

Observations made herein-above by this court are only for the purpose of disposal of this bail application and shall not be construed as an expression of this Court on the merits of the case.

¶23

Order Date :- 17.12.2024 MVS/-

¶24

Digitally signed by :- MANOJ VIKRAM SINGH CHAUHAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Sachchidanand Tiwari v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Civil Sectt. Govt. Lko

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sachchidanand Tiwari v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Civil Sectt. Govt. Lko

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Imran Thru. His Wife Smt. Husna Bano vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko. and 2 Others

Smt. Asiya Thru. Her Husband Irfan vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 10 Others

Vineet Kumar @ Anuj Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.

Mabood vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Govt. Lko

Mohd. Iqbal Ansari Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.

Dharmendra Prajapati Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.