Rahul vs State of U.P.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:79667

Court No. - 88

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 15466 of 2025

Applicant :- Rahul Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Pramod Kumar Dwivedi,Sanjeev Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Ram Manohar Narayan Mishra,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State and also perused the material placed on record.

¶7

The present bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant in Case Crime No.323 of 2024, under Section 2/3 of U.P. Gangsters and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, Police Station Karhal, District Mainpuri, with the prayer to enlarge him on bail.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that applicant is innocent person and has falsely been implicated in the case, and is in jail since 31.08.2024. He further submitted that solitary case registered against him in Gang Chart being Case Crime No.165 of 2024, under Section 8/20/25/29/60 of N.D.P.S., Police Station Karhar, District Mainpuri in which accused applicant has already been enlarged on bail in predicate offence, vide order dated 3.04.2025 passed by this Court in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.31450 of 2024. He further submitted that no other criminal history, has been assigned to the applicant except the present case and predicate offence. He under takes to abide by the conditions of bail, if he be released on bail by order of this court.

¶9

Per contra, learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail and contends that the provisions of Section 19(4) of the Act creates a statutory embargo on release of bail.

¶10

Considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case as well as submissions of learned counsel for the parties and keeping in view the nature of offence, evidence, complicity of accused and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I am of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed.

¶11

Let the applicant- Rahul , who is involved in aforementioned case 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 subject to following conditions.

¶12

(i) 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.

¶13

(ii) The applicant 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 IPC.

¶14

(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., 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.

¶15

(iv) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the Trial Court on dates fixed for (1) opening of the case, (2) framing of charge and (3) 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.

¶16

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

¶17

Order Date :- 14.5.2025 Ashish/-

¶18

Digitally signed by :- ASHISH KUMAR SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Rahul v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rahul v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Doodhnath Tyagi vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home and Another

Shyam Lal vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.

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

Kumara vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko. and 5 Others

Rahul Misra and Another vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko and Another

Javed and Another vs State of U.P.