Allowed

Pappu Singh @ Indrajeet Singh and Another v. State of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Lko

Allahabad HC16 Dec 2024BAIL/12981/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Allahabad High Court, Lucknow Bench granted bail to two applicants in a criminal case registered under Section 3(1) of the U.P. Gangster and Anti Social Activities Act, 1986. The court directed them to furnish a personal bond and two sureties subject to standard conditions of bail compliance.

What did the court decide?

Applicants released on bail by furnishing personal bond and two reliable sureties of like amount.

Pappu Singh @ Indrajeet Singh and Another Vs State of U.P… — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:84038

¶2

Court No. - 12

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 12981 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Pappu Singh @ Indrajeet Singh And Another Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Lko Counsel for Applicant :- Suresh Kumar Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Saurabh Lavania,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicants as well as learned A.G.A. for the State of U.P. and perused the record.

¶7

The present bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicants in Case Crime No. 404/2024, under Section 3(1) U.P. Gangster and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, Police Station Loni Katra, District Barabanki, with the prayer to enlarge him on bail.

¶8

The submissions of learned counsel for the applicants is that the applicant is an innocent person and he has falsely been implicated in the case. It is further submitted that two cases have been shown in the gang chart against the applicants. In Case Crime No. 151/2024 under Sections 406, 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 504 and 506 I.P.C. applicant No.1 is on bail and applicant No.2 is on anticipatory bail and in Case Crime No. 122/2024 under Sections 406, 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 I.P.C. the applicants have already been enlarged on Anticipatory bail by this Court vide orders dated 07.06.2024 and 12.07.2024 passed in Anticipatry Bail Nos. 1310 of 2024 and 1360 of 2024.

¶9

He further stated that in F.I.R., in issue, the allegations with regard to disturbing the public order as also regarding gaining undue temporal, pecuniary, material or other advantage of like nature against the applicants are vague. Further, stated that in absence of allegation concerning an act or omission on the part of an accused, covered by the definition of term "gang" and "gangster" as provided under Section 2 of the Act, no FIR is maintainable. In the instant case, the FIR is based upon the pending criminal case(s) and not upon any new allegation(s) or discovery of fact(s) having serious reflection on the society, for which purpose the Act was enacted.

¶10

He also stated that the provisions of the Act could not be used as a weapon to wreak vengeance or harass or intimidate citizens or to settle scores on political or other fronts.

¶11

He stated that in this case, it appears that the District

¶12

Administration in order to show good work or to win laurels or seek appreciation from the higher authorities of Government or ruling party has invoked the provisions of the Act, which is unjustified.

¶13

He also stated that considering the facts of the case, as stated above, there are reasonable grounds for believing that the applicants are not guilty of the offence under the Gangsters Act and that they would not commit the offence while on bail. He also submitted that the applicants while on bail would not commit any crime/offence nor would try to tamper the evidence or influence the witnesses in any manner whatsoever it may be.

¶14

Learned Counsel for the applicants has submitted that applicants are languishing in jail in this matter since 26.11.2024 and there is no apprehension that, if the facility of bail is granted to the applicant, he may flee from the course of law or he will not appear before the Court below, as also the evidence/material available on record is not strong enough to raise a presumption that the applicant is guilty of the offences mentioned in the gang chart.

¶15

9.In these circumstances, the applicants are entitled for bail. In case of being enlarged on bail, they will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in trial.

¶16

10.Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for grant of bail, but has fairly conceded that in the cases mentioned in the gang chart, the applicants are on bail.

¶17

Considering the rival submissions of learned counsel for parties, material available on record as well as totality of fact and circumstances as also after taking note of Section 19(4)(b) of the Gangsters Act in light of the facts of the case and submission of counsel for the applicants to the effect that while on bail in this case, the applicants would not commit any crime/offence nor would try to tamper the evidence or influence the witnesses in any manner whatsoever it may be and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I am of the view that the applicants are entitled to be released on bail.

¶18

12.Let applicants- Pappu Singh @ Indrajeet Singh and Narendra Pratap Singh @ Akash Singh be released on bail in aforesaid Case Crime, on their furnishing personal bond to the satisfaction of the court concerned forthwith. Applicants are also directed to furnish two reliable sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions:-

¶19

(1) Applicants will not try to influence the witnesses or tamper with the evidence of the case or otherwise misuse the liberty of bail.

¶20

(2) Applicants will fully cooperate in expeditious disposal of the case and shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when witnesses are present in the Court.

¶21

(3) Applicants shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (a) opening of the case, (b) framing of charge; and (c) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C.

¶22

Any violation of above conditions will be treated misuse of bail and learned Court below will be at liberty to pass appropriate order in the matter regarding cancellation of bail.

¶23

Order Date :- 16.12.2024

¶24

Arvind

¶25

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

Pappu Singh @ Indrajeet Singh and Another v. State of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Lko

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pappu Singh @ Indrajeet Singh and Another v. State of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. 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

United India Insurance Company Ltd. through Its Dy. Manager Vs Ram Prasad and Another

The New India Assurance Company Ltd. Vs Rajendra Kumar Srivastava and Others

Unitd India Insurance Comp. Ltd.Aliganj Lko.Throu Its Dy. Vs Fatai and Another

Juvenile X Thru. His Mother Z vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko. and Another

Pappu Singh @ Indrajeet Singh and Another vs State of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Lko

Amit Singh @ Amit Kumar Singh vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Lko