Allowed

Shaukin v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin.Secy. Home

Allahabad HC11 Jan 2024BAIL/329/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this bail application under the U.P. Gangsters Act, the court considered the applicant's custody since November 2023. The applicant, already granted bail in three other cases, submitted an undertaking regarding tampering. Finding it a fit case without expressing an opinion on merits, the court allowed bail with strict conditions.

What did the court decide?

Release on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each, subject to specific undertakings regarding tampering, attendance, and adherence to the U.P. Gangsters Act.

Shaukin vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin.Secy. Home — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:4349

¶2

Court No. - 14

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 329 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Shaukin Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin.Secy. Home Counsel for Applicant :- Chandra Shekhar Singh Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State and perused the record.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that in the gang chart one case has been shown against the applicant. In that case, the applicant has been enlarged on bail. The bail order is on record. Apart from one case, there are two more cases, in which also the applicant has been enlarged on bail. A copy of which has been annexed as Annexure-4 and 5 to the bail application. The applicant is in jail since 10.11.2023.

¶8

It is also submitted that the applicant is ready to furnish an undertaking in terms of requirement of Section 19(4)(b) of U.P. Gangsters & Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986.

¶9

It is further submitted that there is no possibility of the applicant of fleeing away from judicial custody or tampering with the witnesses. In case the applicant is enlarged on bail, he shall not misuse

¶10

the liberty of bail.

¶11

Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid facts as argued by the learned counsel for the applicant.

¶12

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, and also considering the nature of allegations, arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties, for the period for which he is in jail and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case for enlarging the applicant on bail.The application is allowed.

¶13

Let the applicant Shaukin, involved in Case Crime No.05 of 2023, under Sections 2/3 U.P. Gangsters & Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, P.S. Beniganj, district Hardoi, be released on bail 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 which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-

¶14

(i) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.

¶15

(ii) The applicant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.

¶16

(iii) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the

¶17

Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶18

(iv) 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.

¶19

(v) The applicant shall also file an undertaking in terms of requirement of Section 19(4)(b) of U.P. Gangsters & Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 that he will not indulge in any case or misuse the liberty of bail.

¶20

(vi) 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.

¶21

(vii) 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 them, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶22

Order Date :- 16.1.2024/Madhu

¶23

Digitally signed by :- MADHU KUMARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Shaukin v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin.Secy. Home

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shaukin v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin.Secy. Home

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

Pawan Rathore and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.

Jamal Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko.

Ashish Gupta Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.

Kuldeep Singh @ Kaka Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and 3 Others

Haseeb Baba Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin.Secy. Home

Riyaz Ali Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. (Home), Lucknow