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

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:1234

¶2

Court No. - 13

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 133 of 2025

¶4

Applicant :- Mohd. Anwar Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home U.P. Lko.

¶5

Counsel for Applicant :- Anju Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶6

Hon'ble Rajeev Singh,J.

¶7

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

¶8

The present bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant in Case Crime No. 579 of 2024 under Sections 2/3 U.P. Gangsters and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, Police Station - Kotwali Nagar, District - Pratapgarh, with the prayer to enlarge him on bail.

¶9

Submission of learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant is innocent person and has been falsely implicated in the case and is in jail since 21.10.2024. It is further submitted on behalf of applicant that it is undisputed that one case has been shown in the gang chart and in the said case, the applicant is on bail. It is next submitted that co-accused, namely, Mohd. Murad, having identical role, has been granted bail by this Court on 03.01.2025 in Crl. Misc. Bail Application No. 13342 of 2024. Learned counsel for the applicant also submits that the applicant undertakes that he will not involve in any activity, which is against the law. It is, thus, submitted that the applicant is entitled for bail. It is also submitted that in case of being enlarged on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶10

Learned A.G.A. opposes the prayer for grant of bail, but fairly concedes that in the case mentioned in the gang chart, the

¶11

applicant is on bail and co-accused, namely, Mohd. Murad has already been granted bail by this Court.

¶12

Considering the submissions of learned counsel for parties and going through the record, bail order of co-accused - Mohd. Murad, as also in view of the statement made by the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant that the applicant will not involve in any activity, which is against the law, the twin conditions contained under Section 19 (4) of the U.P. Gangsters and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act stand satisfied.

¶13

In view of above, I am of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail.

¶14

Let applicant, namely, Mohd. Anwar be released on bail in F.I.R. No. 579 of 2024, on his furnishing personal bond and two reliable sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions:-

¶15

(i) The applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which he is accused, or suspected, of the commission of which he is suspected.

¶16

(ii) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police office or tamper with the evidence.

¶17

(iii) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the date 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.

¶18

(iv) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on

¶19

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 IPC.

¶20

(v) 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. may be issued and if 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 IPC.

¶21

(vi) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on dates fixed for (a) opening of the case, (b) framing of charge; and (c) 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.

¶22

Any violation of above conditions will be treated misuse of bail and the court below will be at liberty to pass appropriate order in the matter regarding cancellation of bail.

¶23

Subject to above, the bail application is allowed .

¶24

Order Date :- 8.1.2025 Arpan

¶25

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

Mohd. Anwar v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home U.P. Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohd. Anwar v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home U.P. Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Pradeep Kumar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko and Another

Lalita Devi vs Dir. of Enforcement Lko.

Sarvan and Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home. Lko and Another

Pawan Shukla vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home U.P. Lko. and Another

Sunil Pandey vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Ankur Singh and Another vs State of U.P Thru. Secy. Home Lko. and Another