Allowed

Akbar and Another v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko.

Allahabad HC10 May 2024BAIL/5127/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The single judge allowed the bail application of two applicants accused under the U.P. Gangster Prevention Act, citing their past lawful bail grants and a co-accused's bail as sufficient grounds for release subject to standard conditions.

What did the court decide?

Applicants released on bail upon furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each, subject to conditions regarding evidence tampering, witness pressure, and court appearance.

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

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:36226

¶2

Court No. - 19

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 5127 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Akbar And Another Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Of Home Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Sanjeev Kumar Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J.

¶6

Heard Sri Sanjeev Kumar, learned counsel for the applicants, Sri Punit Kumar Yadav, learned counsel for the State and perused the records.

¶7

2.The instant application has been filed seeking release of the applicants on bail in Case Crime No. 309 of 2023, under Sections 2(B)(1)/3 U.P. Gangster & Anti Social Activities (Prevention), Act, registered at Police Station Jagdishpur, District Amethi.

¶8

3.The aforesaid case has been registered on the basis of an F.I.R. lodged on 29.08.2023 against three persons, including the applicants, alleging that accused persons have formed a gang and they are engaged in commission of the offence.

¶9

Gang chart mentions involvement of the applicants in 3 other cases in all of which they have been granted bail.

¶10

5.In the affidavit filed in support of bail application, it has been stated that the applicant is not involved in any case other than the case mentioned in the gang chart. It has been submitted on behalf of the applicants that the co-accused Azad Ahmad has already been granted bail by this court by means of an order dated 04.12.2023, passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.14242 of 2023.

¶11

6.The learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail but he could not dispute the aforesaid aspects of the matter.

¶12

7.Having considered the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and keeping in view the fact that the applicants have been implicated in the present case solely on the basis of their involvement in 3 other cases in all of which they have been granted bail, whereas a co-accused has already been enlarged

¶13

on bail by this court and without making any observation, which may affect the merits of the case, I am of the view that the aforesaid facts are sufficient for making out a case for enlargement of the applicants on bail in the aforesaid crime.

¶14

Accordingly, this bail application stands allowed .

¶15

9.Let the applicants-Akbar and Asgar be released on bail in aforementioned case on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of magistrate/court concerned, subject to following conditions:-

¶16

(i) the applicants shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence;

¶17

(ii) the applicants shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses;

¶18

(iii) the applicants shall appear on each and every date fixed by the trial court unless their personal appearance is exempted by the learned trial court.

¶19

(Subhash Vidyarthi, J.)

¶20

Order Date :- 10.5.2024 Ram.

¶21

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

Akbar and Another v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Akbar and Another v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home 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

M/S A2Z Waste Management (Meerut) Pvt. Ltd. Thru. Its Authorized Signatory Mr. Yuvraj Sharma Vs Construction and Design Services,U.P. Jal Nigam,Noida Thru. Director/Project Manager and 2 Others

Ankit Kumar Singh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy., Revenue Deptt., Lucknow and Others

Rishabh Shukla Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko.

M/S Antriksh Realtech Pvt. Ltd. Ghaziabad Thru. Auth. Signatory Mr. Rajesh Kumar Vs Amit Saxena

Akbar and Another Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko.

Manish Maheshwari Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko. and Another