Meraj v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko

Allahabad HC29 Jul 2025BAIL/6981/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bail allowed under U.P. Gangster Act where applicant already on bail in gang chart case, no prior criminal history, incarcerated since 16.01.2025, State not disputing facts. Conditions imposed including undertakings under Section 19(4) Gangster Act, Section 269 BNS, Section 84 BNSS, Section 209 BNS.

What did the court decide?

Bail granted on personal bond and two sureties each in like amount with conditions ¶¶10

Why is it important?

Meraj Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:43795

¶2

Court No. - 14

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 6981 of 2025

¶4

Applicant :- Meraj Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko Counsel for Applicant :- Pradyumn Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the accused-applicant as well as learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. Learned counsel for accused-applicant while pressing the bail application submits that the accused-applicant has been falsely implicated in the instant case as well as in one case mentioned in the gang chart. In that case applicant has been released on bail. The bail order is on record as Annexure No.3 to the bail application. Apart from the case mentioned in the gang chart, there is no other case pending against the accused applicant. It has been further submitted that applicant is in jail since 16.01.2025 and if facility of bail is granted, there is no apprehension that he will flee from the judicial process and he will abide by the orders passed by the Court below and will cooperate in speedy trial of the case.

¶7

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail but has not disputed the factual submissions made by the learned counsel for the accused-applicant.

¶8

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, and also considering the nature of allegations, arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties and the fact that applicant has been enlarged on bail in one case shown in the gang chart, there

¶9

is no other criminal history of applicant; applicant is in jail since 16.01.2025 and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case for enlarging the applicant on bail.

¶10

Accordingly, the bail application is allowed.

¶11

Let the applicant, Meraj involved in Case Crime No. 39 of 2025, under Sections 2/3(1) of U.P. Gangster and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, Police Station - Kotwali District - Unnao be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-

¶12

(i) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.

¶13

(ii) The applicant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.

¶14

(iii) 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

(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 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. (v) The applicant shall submit an undertaking on affidavit in terms of Section 19 (4) of the U.P. Gangster and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 that he will not indulge in any case for or misuse the liberty of bail.

¶16

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

¶17

of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 269 BNS.

¶18

(vii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 84 BNSS 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 209 BNS.

¶19

Order Date :- 29.7.2025 Saurabh Yadav/-

¶20

Digitally signed by :- SAURABH YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Meraj v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

Meraj v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. 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

Harikesh Pandey @ Harikesh Kumar Pandey Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko

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

Jagdish Mahawat Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.

Hasnain Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko

Raj Kumar Tiwari Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko.

Rakesh Rajneesh @ Monu Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko and Another