Allowed

Vimal Kumar Nishad @ Maalu v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. U.P. Lko.

Allahabad HC24 Jul 2024BAIL/7852/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This order grants bail to the applicant in a gang-related case under the U.P. Gangsters Act. The court allowed the application after finding that Section 19(4) conditions were met and other co-accused were granted bail by the High Court.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail with personal bond and two sureties under specified conditions.

Vimal Kumar Nishad @ Maalu vs State of… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:50097

¶2

Court No. - 32

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 7852 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Vimal Kumar Nishad @ Maalu Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. U.P. Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Pradyumn Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Brij Raj Singh,J.

¶6

1. Case has been taken up through Video Conferencing.

¶7

2. Supplementary affidavit filed on behalf of the applicant, is taken on record.

¶8

3. Heard Sri Pradyumn Shukla, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Gyanendra Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶9

4. The present bail application has been filed by the applicant with a prayer to enlarge him on bail in Case Crime No. 667 of 2023 under Section 2/3 of the U.P. Gangsters and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, Police Station Gangaghat, District Unnao.

¶10

5. Learned counsel for the applicant contends that applicant has been falsely implicated in the instant case. As per the gang chart, three case have been shown against the applicant in which he has been enlarged on bail, a copy two bail orders have been annexed as Anneuxre nos. 3 and 4 to the bail application and a copy of the order passed on third bail has been tendered before the Court by way of supplementary affidavit. He has also submitted that the applicant has no criminal history except the case shown in the gang chart in which he has already been granted bail. It has been submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that co-accused Shekhar Kumar @ Golu Nishad, Faiyyaz Alam Naushad Lari @ Naushad Ahmad, Anshul Thakur @ Yash Pratap Singh, Shahab Lari @ Shahab Anwar, Shadab Lari @ Shadab Anwar have already been granted bail by coordinate Bench this Court vide orders dated 13.05.2024,

¶11

13.03.2024, 17.01.2024, 11.03.2024, 21.12.2023, 02.01.2024 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.5148 of 2024,2819 of 2024, 69 of 2024, 2700 of 2024, 15235 of 2023 and 15416 of 2023 respectively. Lastly, it is contended by the learned counsel for applicant that the applicant is in jail since 22.05.2024.

¶12

6. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the fact that co-accused Shekhar Kumar @ Golu Nishad, Faiyyaz Alam Naushad Lari @ Naushad Ahmad, Anshul Thakur @ Yash Pratap Singh, Shahab Lari @ Shahab Anwar, Shadab Lari @ Shadab Anwar have been granted bail by this Court.

¶13

7. Considering the submissions of learned counsel for the parties, material available on record; contents of F.I.R.; other relevant documents; nature of offence; gang chart; the argument that the applicant is in jail since 22.05.2024, the argument that in all three cases shown in the gang charge, the applicant has been granted bail, this Court finds that condition of Section 19(4) of the Gangster Act is properly complied with as well as the fact that co-accused Shekhar Kumar @ Golu Nishad, Faiyyaz Alam Naushad Lari @ Naushad Ahmad, Anshul Thakur @ Yash Pratap Singh, Shahab Lari @ Shahab Anwar, Shadab Lari @ Shadab Anwar have already been granted bail by this Court, therefore, the applicant is entitled to be released on bail.

¶14

8. Accordingly, the bail application of the applicant is allowed .

¶15

9. Let the applicant, namely, Vimal Kumar Nishad @ Maalu , be released on bail in the above case crime number on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of Court concerned with the following conditions :-

¶16

(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.

¶17

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

¶18

In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶19

(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.

¶20

(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.

¶21

It is made clear that the observations made in this order are limited to the purpose of determination of this bail application and will in no way be construed as an expression on the merits of the case. The Trial Court shall be absolutely free to arrive at its independent conclusions on the basis of evidence led unaffected by anything in this order.

¶22

(Brij Raj Singh, J.)

¶23

Order Date :- 24.7.2024 dk/

¶24

Digitally signed by :- DEVENDRA KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Vimal Kumar Nishad @ Maalu v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. U.P. Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vimal Kumar Nishad @ Maalu v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. U.P. Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Dharmendra Maurya Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko.

Raja Ram Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin.Secy. Home

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

Pradeep Kumar Alias Annu Vs State of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 3 Others

Vimal Kumar Nishad @ Maalu Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. U.P. Lko.

Kaushar Husain Vs Union of India (N.C.B.) Lko.