Allowed

Sabhapati Mishra v. State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.

Allahabad HC28 Aug 2024BAIL/8857/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 8857 of 2024, the Allahabad High Court (Lucknow Bench) granted bail to Sabhapati Mishra charged under the U.P. Gangster and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986. The court, noting prior bails and length of detention, imposed strict conditions for future court appearances.

What did the court decide?

The applicant to be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties, subject to strict conditions regarding court appearance and non-interference.

Sabhapati Mishra vs State of U.P. Thru… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:70737

¶2

Court No. - 15

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 8857 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Sabhapati Mishra Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Jitendra Prakash Mishra,Ram Lal 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.0525 of 2022, under Section 3 (1) U.P. Gangster and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 P.S. Kotwali Nagar, District Barabanki.

¶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 four cases have been shown in the gang chart against the applicant in which he has been enlarged on bail and copy of the bail orders have been annexed as Annexure No 3 to the bail application. He further submits that except the cases mentioned in the gang chart, there are three cases criminal history which has been explained in para 7 of the bail application. It has also been submitted that the applicant is not involved in any anti-social activities and he is neither the member nor the leader of any gang and he is in jail since 24.7.2024. 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

¶10

on bail and there is no any other criminal history of the applicant except explained aforesaid.

¶11

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 and there is no other criminal antecedents except explained aforesaid, coupled with the fact that he is languishing in jail since 24.7.2024, thus, without commenting on the merits of the case, I find it a fit case for bail.

¶12

Considering the submissions of learned counsel of both sides, nature of accusation and severity of punishment in case of conviction, nature of supporting evidence, prima facie satisfaction of the Court in support of the charge, reformative theory of punishment and considering larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India and, without expressing any view on the merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case of bail.

¶13

Let the applicant Sabhapati Mishra involved in the aforementioned crime be released on bail, 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

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

¶15

(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. 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

¶16

229-A of the Indian Penal Code;

¶17

(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

¶18

(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.

¶19

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.

¶20

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.

¶21

Order Date :- 21.10.2024 Ram Murti

¶22

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

Sabhapati Mishra v. State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sabhapati Mishra v. State of U.P. Thru. 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

Mayank Pal vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Stamp and Registration Deptt. and 6 Others

Ubaid Ulla @ Mohd. Ubaid vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Shankar Yadav vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Dr. Jayash Nath Mishra vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Higher Education Lko. and Another

Satyam Tiwari vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko

Deewan Singh vs Stae of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.