Allowed¶12

Abhishek @ Nonu v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC27 Feb 2025BAIL/323/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Allahabad High Court, CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. 323 of 2025, Abhishek @ Nonu v. State of U.P., decided 17.3.2025 by Ashutosh Srivastava, J. Bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C. in Case Crime No. 453 of 2024 under Section 2/3, U.P. Gangsters and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, P.S. Kotwali, Muzaffar Nagar; Section 19(4) of the Act considered; gang-chart with five cases, applicant already on bail in all; A.G.A. did not oppose; bail allowed on personal bond and two sureties with conditions; observations limited to bail determination.

What did the court decide?

Bail granted to applicant Abhishek @ Nonu in Case Crime No. 453 of 2024 on furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to the enumerated conditions (paras 13-17). ¶12

Abhishek @ Nonu vs State of U.P. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶12

Issue for consideration

Whether the applicant Abhishek @ Nonu, arraigned in Case Crime No. 453 of 2024 under Section 2/3 of the U.P. Gangsters and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, P.S. Kotwali, District Muzaffar Nagar, deserves to be released on bail during pendency of the trial.

¶7

Court's answer

Considering the totality of facts, the nature and evidence reflected from the record, and the provision of Section 19(4) of the U.P. Gangsters Act, and without expressing any opinion on the merits, the court found it a fit case for bail and allowed the bail application.

¶11

Ratio / Principle

The applicant was directed to be released on bail in Case Crime No. 453 of 2024 on furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties of the like amount, subject to conditions including non-inducement/non-tampering with witnesses and evidence, presence before the trial court on fixed dates (opening of case, framing of charge, recording of statement, and each date personally or through counsel), filing of an undertaking not to seek adjournments when witnesses are present, breach being a ground for cancellation of bail.

¶12

Key takeaways

Anything said in the order is limited to the purpose of determining the bail application and shall not be construed as an expression on the merits; the trial court remains free to arrive at independent conclusions on the evidence.obiter¶19

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C. allowed by the Allahabad High Court (Ashutosh Srivastava, J.) to the applicant, booked in Case Crime No. 453 of 2024 under Section 2/3 of the U.P. Gangsters and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, P.S. Kotwali, District Muzaffar Nagar. The gang-chart showed five criminal cases in all of which the applicant was already on bail; the learned A.G.A. did not oppose the prayer and pointed out no other case. Taking into account Section 19(4) of the Act, custody since 16.12.2024, absence of flight/tampering risk, and heavy pendency delaying trial, the court found it a fit case for bail without expressing any opinion on merits. Release ordered on a personal bond and two reliable sureties, with conditions against tampering/inducement, pressure on prosecution witnesses, and requiring presence before the trial court on fixed dates and an undertaking not to seek adjournments; breach to be a ground for cancellation. Observations confined to the bail determination only.

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:37475

¶2

Court No. - 68

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 323 of 2025

¶4

Applicant :- Abhishek @ Nonu Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Asheesh Kumar Tiwari Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Ashutosh Srivastava,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Rajesh Kumar Singh, learned AGA for the State-Respondent and perused the record.

¶7

The present bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. has been filed on behalf of applicant with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 453 of 2024, under Section 2/3 of the Uttar Pradesh Gangsters and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, registered at Police Station Kotwali, District Muzaffar Nagar, during pendency of the trial.

¶8

It has been submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case due to ulterior motive. In gang-chart annexed as Annexure No. 2, five criminal cases have been shown, in which the applicant has already been enlarged on bail.

¶9

It is further submitted that the applicant is not a member or leader or organizer of a gang and he has not abetted or assisted in the activities of a gang as enumerated in clause (b) of Section 2 of the Act. Applicant has no criminal history except the aforesaid case. It is next submitted that there is also no possibility of the applicant either fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the witnesses. The applicant, who is languishing in jail since 16.12.2024, undertakes that he will not misuse the liberty, if granted. It has also been pointed out that in the wake of heavy pendency of cases in the Court, there is no likelihood of any early conclusion of trial.

¶10

Per contra learned A.G.A. could not oppose the prayer for bail of the applicant and also could not pointed out any other case against the applicant except the case shown in the gang-chart made by learned counsel for the applicant.

¶11

Upon considering the totality of facts, nature and the evidence reflected from record and also taking into consideration the provision of Section 19(4) of the Act and without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case for bail. Hence, the present bail application is allowed .

¶12

Let the applicant, Abhishek @ Nonu, be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on his furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions-

¶13

(i) 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 officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶14

(ii) The applicant shall not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witnesses.

¶15

(iii) 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.

¶16

(iv) 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 the trial court.

¶17

(v) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel.

¶18

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

¶19

It is clarified that anything said in this order is limited to the purpose of determination of this bail application and will in no way be construed as an expression on the merits of the case. The trial court shall be absolutely free to arrive at its independent conclusions on the basis of evidence led unaffected by anything said in this order.

¶20

Order Date :- 17.3.2025 pks

¶21

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

Abhishek @ Nonu v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Abhishek @ Nonu 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

Sudheer and Another vs State of U.P.

Mahipal vs State of U.P.

Suraj Maurya vs State of U.P.

Sikandar vs State of U.P.

Anjali vs State of U.P.

Jaichandra vs State of U.P.