Allowed¶12

Ramu Bind v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC20 Feb 2025BAIL/5812/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Allahabad High Court bail order dated 10.4.2025 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 5812 of 2025 (Ramu Bind v. State of U.P.), Neutral Citation 2025:AHC:53011; bail allowed under Section 3(1) U.P. Gangsters and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986; Section 19(4) considered; Case Crime No. 199 of 2023, P.S. Kotwali, District Ghazipur; custody since 20.04.2023; conditions imposed; no opinion on merits.

What did the court decide?

Applicant Ramu Bind released on bail in Case Crime No. 199 of 2023 on furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties of the like amount, subject to conditions regarding non-tampering, non-intimidation of witnesses, presence before the trial court, and undertaking not to seek adjournments when witnesses are present. ¶12

Ramu Bind vs State of U.P. — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶12

Issue for consideration

Whether the applicant Ramu Bind should be released on bail in Case Crime No. 199 of 2023 under Section 3(1) of the U.P. Gangsters and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, during pendency of 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 Act, and without expressing any opinion on merits, the court found it a fit case for bail.

¶12

Ratio / Principle

The applicant was directed to be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to enumerated conditions; breach of any condition shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.

¶13

Key takeaways

Anything said in the order is limited to the purpose of determination of 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.ratio¶20

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bail granted under Section 3(1) of the U.P. Gangsters and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 (Case Crime No. 199 of 2023, P.S. Kotwali, District Ghazipur). The Allahabad High Court, considering the totality of facts, the evidence on record and Section 19(4) of the Act, and noting that the applicant had allegedly already been released on bail in all gang-chart cases and was in custody since 20.04.2023, held the case fit for bail without expressing any opinion on merits. Release ordered on personal bond and two sureties, with conditions against tampering with evidence/witnesses and requiring presence at trial; breach made a ground for cancellation. Observations confined to the bail determination only. Neutral Citation: 2025:AHC:53011.

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:53011

¶2

Court No. - 68

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 5812 of 2025

¶4

Applicant :- Ramu Bind Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Kalp Dev Mishra,Punit Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Ashutosh Srivastava,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Shashank Singh, learned State Law Officer, for the State-Respondent and perused the record.

¶7

The present bail application has been filed on behalf of applicant with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 199 of 2023, under Section 3(1) Uttar Pradesh Gangsters and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, registered at Police Station Kotwali, District Ghazipur, 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. Criminal history as mentioned in the gangchart has been explained in the affidavit filed in support of the bail application. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has already been released on bail in all the cases mentioned in the gang chart.

¶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 20.04.2023, 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

¶11

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.

¶12

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 .

¶13

Let the applicant, Ramu Bind, 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-

¶14

(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.

¶15

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

¶16

(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.

¶17

(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.

¶18

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

¶19

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

¶20

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.

¶21

Order Date :- 10.4.2025 pks

¶22

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

Ramu Bind v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ramu Bind 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

Devendra vs State of U.P.

Mahendra Alias Lala vs State of U.P.

Nathuni Harijan vs State of U.P.

Bajeer Alias Bajeera vs State of U.P.

Akash vs State of U.P.

Naushad vs State of Up