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

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:2932

Court No. - 13

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 419 of 2025

Applicant :- Arvind Kumar Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Riyaz Ahmad,Hemant Kumar Pandey,Osama Syed

¶5

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.114 of 2022, under Sections 2(b)(i)/3(1) U.P. Gangster and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, Police Station - Talkatora, District - Lucknow, with the prayer to enlarge him on bail.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is an innocent person and has been falsely implicated in the case and he is in jail since 24.5.2022. It is further submitted that description of two cases have been shown against the applicant in the gang chart and in the said cases applicant is on bail (bail order is annexed to the bail application). He also submits that applicant was also implicated in one another case, in which, he is on bail. He further submits that applicant will not involve in any illegal activities in the future. In these circumstances, the applicant is entitled for bail. In case of being enlarged on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶10

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for grant of bail, but has fairly conceded that in the cases mentioned in the gang chart, applicant is on bail.

¶11

Considering the submissions of learned counsel for parties and going through the record 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

¶12

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, Arvind Kumar be released on bail 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 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.

¶19

(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.

¶20

(vi) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on dates fixed for (a) opening

¶21

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

Order Date :- 17.1.2025 Gaurav/-

¶24

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

Arvind Kumar v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Arvind Kumar v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

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

Ram Singh Vs the State of U.P.

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

Lalita Devi vs Dir. of Enforcement Lko.

Veerendra Thru. His Father Ganesh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko and 5 Others

Chandra Shekhar and Another Vs State of U.P.

Jalaj Pathak @ Krishnadev Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 2 Others