Allowed

Pradeep Mallah @ Pradeep Nishad v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Allahabad HC3 Sept 2024CRLA/2721/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Apex Court allowed the bail application filed by the appellant in the criminal appeal against a judgment of his detention. The Court held that the appellant was entitled to release on bail pending appeal on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties.

What did the court decide?

Appellant to be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties subject to specified conditions.

Pradeep Mallah @ Pradeep Nishad vs State of U.P. Thru… — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Court No. - 11

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 2721 of 2024

¶3

Appellant :- Pradeep Mallah @ Pradeep Nishad Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. Counsel for Appellant :- Sukhveer Singh Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Abdul Moin,J.

¶5

Order on memo of appeal

¶6

Heard.

¶7

Admit.

¶8

Summon the trial court record.

¶9

List after six weeks.

¶10

In the meantime, objections may be filed.

¶11

Order on First Bail Application

¶12

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

¶13

A prayer for bail has been made by the appellant in this criminal appeal, which has been filed against the Judgment and order dated 01.07.2024 passed by Additional District and Session Judge, Court No. 5, Unnao in S.T. No. 206 of 2013 arising out of Case Crime No. 321 of 2023 under Section 2/3 (1) of the U.P Gangster and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 Police Station - Gangahat, District Unnao.

¶14

Argument of the learned counsel for the appellant is that as per the specific averment made in paragraph 9 of the bail application the appellant has been in jail for about one year and three months and thus has already spent substantial period in jail as awarded to him vide order dated 01.07.2024 which is of two years. Learned counsel for the appellant further submits that appellant was falsely implicated in the present case. He further submits that during trial, appellant was on bail and he did not misuse the liberty of bail. He further submits that trial court failed to appreciate the evidence deposed by the prosecution witnesses in the correct prospective. He further submits that there is no possibility of conclusion of the appeal in near future, hence, the appellant is entitled for bail.

¶15

Learned A.G.A. opposes the prayer for bail and submits that conviction of the appellant is on the basis of evidence on record.

¶16

Having heard the submission made by learned counsel for the appellant as well as learned A.G.A and perused the material brought on record, this Court is of the view that appellant is entitled to be released on bail during the pendency of criminal appeal before this Court.

¶17

Accordingly, the application for bail is allowed.

¶18

Let the applicant involved in aforesaid case be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each of the amount to the satisfaction of the learned Court concerned subject to following conditions:-

¶19

(i) Fine imposed by the trial court shall be deposited by the appellant at the time of his release.

¶20

(ii) The appellant shall cooperate in the disposal of appeal without seeking unnecessary adjournment.

¶21

(iii) The appellant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail.

¶22

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.

¶23

As soon as personal bonds and sureties are furnished, photocopies of the same are directed to be transmitted to this Court forthwith by the trial court concerned to be kept on record of this appeal.

¶24

Order Date :- 3.9.2024 Pachhere/-

¶25

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

Pradeep Mallah @ Pradeep Nishad v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pradeep Mallah @ Pradeep Nishad v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

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

Similar cases

Pankaj Kumar Shukla Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Lko and 2 Others

Smt. Neelam Kumari Alias Neelam Verma Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko and Another

Mithlesh Yadav Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. Thru. S.H.O., Lko. and Another

Ashfaq Hussain and Another Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Others

Ram Kumar and 5 Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Dept. Lko and Another

Mohd. Saif vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko and Another