Allowed

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

Allahabad HC17 May 2024BAIL/5351/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Allahabad High Court allowed bail to the applicant, Israr, in a case involving the U.P. Gangster and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act. Although the state opposed the plea, the court relied on prior bail grants in related cases and the applicant's undertaking of non-misuse to release him on personal and surety bonds.

What did the court decide?

Release on bail with personal bond and two sureties. Conditions include undertaking against adjournments, regular attendance, no country escape, and absence penalties under Section 229-A IPC and Secti

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

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:37944

¶2

Court No. - 11

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 5351 of 2024 Applicant :- Israr Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin.Secy. Home Counsel for Applicant :- Shahbaaz Khan Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.

¶5

1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned Additional Government Advocate for the State.

¶6

2. As per learned counsel for the applicant, the present applicant (Israr) is languishing in jail since 05.04.2024 in Case Crime No.0095 of 2024, under Section 2/3 of U.P. Gangster and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, Police Station-Malihabad, District-Lucknow.

¶7

3. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the present applicant has falsely been implicated in this case as he has not committed any offence as alleged in the prosecution story.

¶8

4. Learned counsel for the applicant has further submitted that against the present applicant there are two cases shown in the gang chart (Annexure No.2) in which the applicant has been granted bail by the learned court below and the bail orders have been enclosed as Annexure Nos.3 & 4 to this bail application.

¶9

5. Learned counsel for the applicant has further submitted that the present applicant has not misused the liberty of bail so granted to him and detention of the present applicant under Gangster Act is unwarranted. The present applicant is having no previous criminal history of any kind whatsoever. He undertakes that the applicant shall not misuse the liberty of bail, if so granted by this Court and shall abide by all terms and conditions of the bail order and shall cooperate with the trial proceedings properly.

¶10

6. Learned Additional Government Advocate has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the present applicant by submitting that since involvement of the applicant has been found in the commission of crime, therefore, he may not be enlarged on bail, but he could not dispute the aforesaid submissions of learned counsel for the applicant.

¶11

7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, perusing the material available on record, arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties and also considering the fact that the cases shown in the gang-chart the present applicant has been granted bail by the learned court below and the orders thereof have been annexed as Annexure Nos.3 & 4, the undertaking that the applicant shall not misuse the liberty of bail and shall abide by all terms and conditions of the bail order and shall cooperate with the trial proceedings properly, without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, I find it appropriate that the present applicant may be enlarged on bail. Therefore, the instant bail application is allowed.

¶12

8. Let the applicant (Israr) be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime

¶13

number 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:-

¶14

(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.

¶15

(ii) 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.

¶16

(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 applicants fail 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.

¶17

(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. The present applicant shall not leave the country without prior permission of the Court.

¶18

[Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.]

¶19

Order Date :- 17.5.2024 Suresh/

¶20

Digitally signed by :- SURESH CHANDRA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

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

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Israr 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Mohd. Zaid Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lko.

Suraj Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin.Secy. Home Deptt.

Amarjeet Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin.Secy. Home Deptt. Lucknow

Janakraj vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home U.P. Lko.

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

Bhagwati Prasad Giri vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko. and 2 Others