Manish Yadav v. The State Of U.p. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko

Manish Yadav v. The State Of U.p. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko

(High Court Of Judicature At Allahabad, Lucknow Bench)

CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 6539 of 2022 | 22-06-2022

Mohd. Aslam,J.

1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

2. The instant application has been moved on behalf of applicantManish Yadav with a prayer to enlarge him on bail in Case Crime No. 117 of 2022, under Section 3(1) of UP Gangsters & Anti-social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, Police StationKotwali Nagar, District- Sultanpur, during pendency of trial.

3. It has been submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is wholly innocent and he has falsely been implicated in this case due to ulterior motive. It is further contended that four cases have been shown against the applicant in the Gang Chart which has been annexed as Annexure No. 2 to the affidavit filed in support of the bail application. Apart from the cases as shown in the gang-chart, the applicant is alleged to have involved in seven other criminal cases which have been dully explained in para 5 of the affidavit. In all the aforesaid cases, the applicant has been granted bail by the competent Court. The copy of bail orders has been annexed as Annexure Nos. 3 to 13 the affidavit. It is further submitted that in case the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in trial. Therefore, the applicant, who is languishing in jail since 23.01.2022, deserves to be enlarged on bail during the pendency of trial.

4. Learned A.G.A. for the State has opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid submissions advanced by learned counsel for the applicant.

5. Having heard the submissions of learned counsel for the parties, nature of accusation and the severity of the punishment in case of conviction and the nature of supporting evidence and without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, I find it to be a fit case for bail.

6. Accordingly, the bail application stands allowed.

7. Let the applicant- Manish Yadav involved in the aforesaid crime be released on bail on executing a personal bond and furnishing two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:-

i) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence;

ii) The applicant shall not threaten or harass the prosecution witnesses;

iii) The applicant shall appear on the date fixed by the trial court;

iv) The applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which the applicant is accused, or suspected of the commission;

v) 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 such person from disclosing facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

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

9. Identity, status and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted.

Advocate List
Bench
  • Hon'ble Justice Mohd. Aslam
Eq Citations
  • LQ
  • LQ/AllHC/2022/9189
Head Note

A. Crimes Against Society — UP Gangsters & Anti-social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 — S. 3(1) — Applicability of bail — Applicant alleged to be a gangster — Alleged to be involved in seven other criminal cases — Applicant granted bail in all the cases — Applicant languishing in jail since 23.01.2022 — Without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, held, it is a fit case for bail — Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 — Ss. 437 and 439 — Bail — Grant of bail — Practice (Paras 2 to 6)