Allowed

Ajay Yadav v. State of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.

Allahabad HC16 Jul 2024BAIL/7631/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court allowed bail to the applicants in a case under the U.P. Gangster and Anti Social Activities Act, 1986. The decision was based on the applicant's prior enlargement on bail and current detention, without commenting on the merits of the charges.

What did the court decide?

Release of applicant on bail upon furnishing personal bond and two sureties against conditions including appearance in court and absence of tampering.

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

¶1

Court No. - 28

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 7631 of 2024

¶3

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

¶4

Counsel for Applicant :- Nijam Ahamad Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Shree Prakash Singh,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶7

The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant with a prayer to release the applicant on bail during the trial in Case Crime No. 103 of 2024, under Section 3(1) U.P. Gangster and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, P.S.- Aliganj, District -Ambedkar Nagar.

¶8

It is contended by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the present case. He further submits that two cases have been shown in the gang chart against the applicant in which he has been enlarged on bail and the same is explained in para 6 of the bail application. It has also been submitted that the applicant is not involved in any anti-social activities and he is not a member of any gang. He further submits that there is no any other criminal history of the applicant except the case expalined. The applicant is in jail since 14.05.2024. In case he is granted bail, he will not misuse the liberty and would cooperate in the trial proceedings.

¶9

Per contra, learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer of bail but he could not dispute the fact that the applicant has been enlarged on bail and criminal history of the applicant has been explained aforesaid.

¶10

Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and after perusal of record, I find that applicant has been enlarged on bail in the cases mentioned in the gang chart as well as mentioned in paragraph 6 of the bail application, coupled with the fact that he is languishing in jail since 14.05.2024, thus without commenting on the merits of the case, I find it a fit case for bail.

¶11

Let the applicant- Ajay Yadav involved in the aforementioned crime be released on bail, on his furnishing a personal bond and

¶12

two sureties each in the like amount, to the satisfaction of the court concerned, with the following conditions:-

¶13

(1) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/ pressurizing the witnesses, or otherwise during the investigation or trial;

¶14

(2) 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.

¶15

He 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

(3) 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.; and

¶17

(4) 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, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶18

The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by the court concerned and in case of breach of any of the above conditions, the court below shall be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicant to prison.

¶19

It is clarified that the observations made in this order are strictly confined to the disposal of this bail application and must not be construed to have any reflection on the merits of the case.

¶20

Order Date :- 16.7.2024 Anurag

¶21

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

Ajay Yadav v. State of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

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

Sri Himanshu Gupta vs State of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Home, Lko. and Another

Javed Alam (Husaband) and 6 Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Its Secy. Home Deptt. Lko and Another

Suneeta Mishra vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Rajdeai and Another vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Deptt. U.P. Lko. and Another

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

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