Allowed

Vishal Saroj v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Allahabad HC21 Feb 2025BAIL/1632/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Allahabad High Court allowed a bail application filed by Vishal Saroj under the U.P. Gangster and Anti-Social Activities Act. Despite the State's opposition, the court granted bail based on parity with co-accused bail and banker undertakings, imposing strict conditions to prevent misuse.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail furnishing a personal bond and two sureties with conditions including no adjournments, presence in court, and no leaving India without permission.

Vishal Saroj Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2025)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:11377

¶2

Court No. - 11

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 1632 of 2025

¶4

Applicant :- Vishal Saroj Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Sachin Verma Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.

¶6

1. Heard Sri Sachin Verma, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Ran Vijay Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶7

2. As per learned counsel for the applicant, the present applicant (Vishal Saroj) is in jail since 13.02.2024 in Case Crime No.02 of 2024, under Section 2/3 of U.P. Gangster and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, Police Station-Harchandpur, District- Raebareli.

¶8

3. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that against the present applicant, only four cases have been indicated in the gang chart in which the applicant has been granted bail. The bail orders thereof have been enclosed collectively as Annexure No.3 to the bail application. Learned counsel for the applicant has explained the criminal history of one other case of the applicant in Para 3 of the supplementary affidavit wherein the present applicant has also been granted bail as the bail order thereof has been annexed as Annexure No.SA-1 to the supplementary affidavit. He has submitted that the co-accused of this case, namely, Dheeraj Saroj, has been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 05.07.2024 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.6150 of 2024; Dheeraj Saroj vs. State of U.P., therefore, on the basis of principles of parity, the present applicant may also be enlarged on bail.

¶9

4. Learned counsel for the applicant has further submitted that the present applicant has not misused the liberty of bail so granted to him and detention of the present applicant under Gangster Act is unwarranted. He has further submitted that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the case as he has not committed any offence as alleged. Further, the applicant undertakes that he shall not misuse the liberty of bail, if so granted by this Court and shall abide by all terms and conditions of the bail order and shall cooperate in the trial proceedings properly.

¶10

5. Learned A.G.A. has, however, opposed the prayer for bail of the present applicant but he could not dispute the aforesaid submissions of learned counsel for the applicant.

¶11

6. Without entering into merits of the issue; considering the arguments of learned counsel for the parties; contents and allegations of the FIR; the fact that five cases have been shown against the present applicant in the gang-chart in which he has been granted bail; considering the fact that the co-accused, Dheeraj Saroj, has been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 05.07.2024 (supra) and undertaking of the applicant that he shall cooperate in the trial proceedings properly and shall not misuse the liberty of bail, I find it appropriate to release the applicant on bail.

¶12

7. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed.

¶13

8. Let applicant (Vishal Saroj) be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number 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

(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.

¶15

(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 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶16

(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.

¶17

(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.

¶18

(v) The applicant shall not leave India without previous

¶19

permission of the court.

¶20

[Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.]

¶21

Order Date :- 21.2.2025 Suresh/

¶22

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

Vishal Saroj v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vishal Saroj 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Pankaj Kumar Pathak Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.

Suraj Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Dileep Kumar Mishra Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

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

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

Ravi Sahu Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Civil Secretariat Lko.