Allowed

Sanjay Yadav Pradhan v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Govt. Lko.

Allahabad HC1 Apr 2024BAIL/3575/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court granted bail to the applicant in a case under the U.P. Gangster and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, finding no prima facie offence made out and noting the applicant was already on bail in related matters. Conditions were imposed regarding court attendance and witness non-influence.

What did the court decide?

Bail granted with conditions including personal bond, sureties, and strict attendance requirements.

Sanjay Yadav Pradhan vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy… — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:34910

¶2

Court No. - 14

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 3575 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Sanjay Yadav Pradhan Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Govt. Lko.

¶5

Counsel for Applicant :- Vyas Narayan Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶6

Hon'ble Jaspreet Singh,J.

¶7

Rejoinder-affidavit has been filed by the applicant which is taken on record.

¶8

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned AGA for the State-respondent.

¶9

The submission of the learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant has been falsely implicated in Case Crime No.0043 of 2024, under Section 2(b)(1) 3 of U.P. Gangster and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, Police Station Musafirkhana, District Amethi.

¶10

The submission is that as per the gang chart, a copy of which has been brought on record as Annexure No.2, the applicant is shown to be involved in two cases. It is submitted that in both the cases, the applicant has been enlarged on bail and the copies of the bail orders have been brought on record as Annexures No.3 and 4 respectively.

¶11

It has also been submitted that except the cases shown in the gang-chart, the applicant has also been falsely roped in fourteen other false cases and the applicant has been enlarged on bail and the bail orders have been brought on record collectively as Annexure no.5 and there is no other case is pending against the applicant. Neither the applicant is a gang leader of any gang nor is he indulged in any criminal and antisocial activities.

¶12

It has further been submitted that the applicant is in jail since 11.03.2024 and there is no credible

¶13

evidence on record which could show that the applicant is guilty or committed the crime in question and no prima facie offence under section 2(b) (1) 3 of U.P. Gangster and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act is made out against the applicant.

¶14

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail, however, could not dispute the aforesaid facts.

¶15

Considering the rival submissions, the facts and circumstances of the case and the material available on record as well as considering the nature of allegations and accusation against the applicant, the severity of the punishment if convicted and the period of incarceration as well as the fact that no apprehension has been expressed by the learned AGA that the applicant is at the risk of fleeing justice or that he would tamper with evidence or influence any witness, hence, at this stage, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail.

¶16

Let the applicant Sanjay Yadav Pradhan involved in Case Crime No.0043 of 2024, under Section 2(b)(1) 3 of U.P. Gangster and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, Police Station Musafirkhana, District Amethi be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two reliable sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned.

¶17

At the time of executing required sureties the following conditions shall be imposed in the interest of justice.

¶18

(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.

¶19

(ii) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or

¶20

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

(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.

¶22

(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.

¶23

(v) The applicant shall neither influence any witness nor tamper with any evidence after his release.

¶24

Order Date :- 6.5.2024

¶25

ank

¶26

Digitally signed by :- ALI NEWAZ KHAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Sanjay Yadav Pradhan v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Govt. Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sanjay Yadav Pradhan v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. 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

Akansha Dixit Vs the Prin. Judge Family Court Lko. and Another

Mohammad Hashim Husain Vs Consolidation Officer, Beekapur, Ayodhya and Others

Sarla Devi and Another Vs Civil Judge (S.D.) Sitapur and 18 Others

Pawan Kumar @ Pappu Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Secy. Lko.

Sameer Kumar @ Surendra Mohan Srivastava Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Sectt. Lko

Faisal Ahmad Vs State of U.P. Thru Secy. Home Deptt. Lko and Ors.