First bail application under the U.P. Gangsters Act for Case Crime No. 201 of 2024. The applicant was already enlarged on bail in all three cases listed in the gang chart and several other cases. Relying on Sanjay Chandra v. CBI, the court held Section 19(4) conditions stood complied with and allowed bail.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:20187
Court No. - 13
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 3004 of 2025
Applicant :- Suraj Mishra Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Suresh Chandra Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Manish Mathur,J.
specifically held that bail is to be a norm and an under-trial is not required to be in jail for ever pending trial. Relevant paragraphs of the judgment are as under :-
"21. In bail applications, generally, it has been laid down from the earliest times that the object of bail is to secure the appearance of the accused person at his trial by reasonable amount of bail. The object of bail is neither punitive nor preventative. Deprivation of liberty must be considered a punishment, unless it is required to ensure that an accused person will stand his trial when called upon. The courts owe more than verbal respect to the principle that punishment begins after conviction, and that every man is deemed to be innocent until duly tried and duly found guilty."
"27. This Court, time and again, has stated that bail is the rule and committal to jail an exception. It has also observed that refusal of bail is a restriction on the personal liberty of the individual guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution."
(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.
(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.
(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.
(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.
Order Date :- 10.4.2025 Renu/-
Digitally signed by :- RENU AGARWAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the applicant is entitled to bail under the Gangsters Act given he is already on bail in the cases shown in his gang chart.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Sanjay Chandra v. Central Bureau of InvestigationRelied on¶6
(2012) 1 SCC 40 · Who else cites this
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Suraj Mishra
State Of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Lko.
Manish Mathur
As recorded by the court registry
2 orders share this CNR
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
