Allowed¶13

Rakesh v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC13 Feb 2025BAIL/652/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bail granted; U.P. Gangsters and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986; Section 2/3; Section 19(4); clause (b) of Section 2; Case Crime No. 161 of 2024; P.S. Sadar Bazar, District Mathura; applicant Rakesh; custody since 02.12.2024; personal bond and two sureties; bail conditions; no opinion on merits; High Court of Judicature at Allahabad; Ashutosh Srivastava, J.; CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. 652 of 2025; Neutral Citation 2025:AHC:49731; Order Date 7.4.2025.

What did the court decide?

Bail granted to applicant Rakesh in Case Crime No. 161 of 2024 on furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to five listed conduct/presence conditions; breach of any condition to be a ground for cancellation of bail. ¶13

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

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶13

Issue for consideration

Whether the applicant Rakesh should be released on bail in Case Crime No. 161 of 2024 under Section 2/3 of the U.P. Gangsters and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, during pendency of the trial.

¶8

Ratio / Principle

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

¶13

Key takeaways

Applicant Rakesh to be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number 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 (no inducement, threat or promise to dissuade disclosure or tamper with evidence; no pressurising/intimidating prosecution witnesses; personal presence at opening of case, framing of charge and recording of statement; undertaking not to seek adjournments on evidence dates when witnesses are present; presence on each fixed date personally or through counsel).ratio¶14
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 absolutely free to arrive at independent conclusions on the evidence led.obiter¶21

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Allahabad High Court (Ashutosh Srivastava, J.; Neutral Citation 2025:AHC:49731) allowed the bail application of Rakesh in Case Crime No. 161 of 2024, under Section 2/3 of the Uttar Pradesh Gangsters and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, registered at Police Station Sadar Bazar, District Mathura, with trial pending. Considering the totality of facts, nature and evidence on record and the provision of Section 19(4) of the Act, and without expressing any opinion on the merits, the judge found it a fit case for bail. The applicant, in jail since 02.12.2024, was ordered released on a personal bond and two reliable sureties of the like amount, subject to conditions barring inducement/tampering and intimidation of witnesses and requiring presence at key trial stages; breach of conditions was flagged as a ground for cancellation. Observations were expressly confined to the bail determination, leaving the trial court free to reach independent conclusions.

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:49731

¶2

Court No. - 68

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 652 of 2025

¶4

Applicant :- Rakesh Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Kartikey Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Ashutosh Srivastava,J.

¶6

Supplementary affidavit filed today by learned counsel for the applicant is taken on record.

¶7

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Yagvalkya Pandey, learned AGA for the State-Respondent and perused the record.

¶8

The present bail application has been filed on behalf of applicant with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 161 of 2024, under Section 2/3 of the Uttar Pradesh Gangsters and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, registered at Police Station Sadar Bazar, District Mathura, during pendency of the trial.

¶9

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.

¶10

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 02.12.2024, 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.

¶11

Per contra learned A.G.A. could not oppose the prayer for bail of

¶12

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.

¶13

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 .

¶14

Let the applicant, Rakesh, 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-

¶15

(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.

¶16

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

¶17

(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.

¶18

(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.

¶19

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

¶20

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

¶21

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.

¶22

Order Date :- 7.4.2025 pks

¶23

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

Rakesh v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rakesh 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

Shakeel Ahmed vs State of U.P.

Pawan Kumar vs State of U.P.

Shehzaade @ Chedi vs State of U.P.

Binod Yadav vs State of U.P.

Amit Patel Alias Gorelal Patel vs State of U.P.

Haqiqat vs State of U.P.