It is well settled position of law that bail is the rule and committal vs No material or circumstances has been brought to the notice of this

Heard Sri Sushil Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri R.K. Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material on record. The present bail application has been filed on behalf of applicant Najim under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, with a prayer to enlarge him on bail in Case Crime No. 223 of 2024 for offence punishable under Sections 2/3 of U.P. Gangsters and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, registered at Police Station- Kotwali Nagar, District- Muzaffarnagar, during pendency of the trial, after rejecting the bail application of the applicant by Additional Sessions Judge/Special Judge (Gangsters Act), Court No. 5, Muzaffarnagar vide order dated 16.09.2024. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. It is further submitted that the gang chart as shown has not been prepared after complying the mandatory provision of rule 5(3)(c)(e) of U.P. Gangsters & Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Rules, 2021. The gang chart has been signed on different dates, which clearly shows that gang chart has not been prepared as per rule. It is further submitted that applicant has criminal history of 23 other cases including the cases of Gang-chart. It is further submitted that the applicant explained the criminal history of 23 other cases in paragraph 3 of the supplementary affidavit in tabular form in chronological order. It is further submitted that eight cases are related to U.P. Prevention of Cow Slaughter Act, which are related to the years 2012, 2015, 2016, 2018, 2023 and 2024. It is further submitted that in all cases, applicant is granted bail. It is further submitted that there is no pre-summoning evidence or inquiry was made against the applicant for property which is alleged to have been gained by the aforesaid criminal history. It is further submitted that there is no pre-summoning evidence with regard to the fact that the applicant has run any gang or a gang leader as defined in the Act. It is next contended that applicant is neither a member of any gang nor a gang leader and he is not indulged in any anti-social activities as alleged by the prosecution in the first information report. It is further submitted that there is no other evidence with regard to tampering the evidence in the pending cases. It is further submitted that the provisions of the Act have been ill- used by the Police in order to perpetuate the detention of the applicant in jail anyhow even though the offence under the aforesaid Act is not made out. It is also submitted that the applicant is not a gangster and has never acted or conducted himself as such. Learned counsel for the applicant has also tried to demonstrate that the alleged previous offences which are said to have been committed by the applicant can at the most be said to be stray incident of breach of law having no nexus with the definition of a gangster as has been provided in the Act. Learned counsel for the applicant further urged that the F.I.R. in question has been lodged without containing the facts that the applicant is a member of gang as provided in the Act. It is further submitted that other co-accused Tanveer, Haneef, Kaleem, Ikram, Rashid, Shahzad, Gayyur, Nawab have already been granted bail by this court as well as co-ordinate Benches of this Court in Criminal Misc. Bail Application Nos. 20941 of 2024, 24040 of 2024, 21129 of 2024, 21470 of 2024, 20508 of 2024, 21212 of 2024, 20871 of 2024 and 23278 of 2024 vide order dated 29.05.2024, 26.06.2024, 29.5.2024, 31.05.2024, 31.5.2024, 30.05.2024, 13.06.2024 and 16.07.2024 respectively. It is further submitted that other co-accused Manawwar Alias Bholu, having similar role has already been granted bail by this court in Criminal Misc. Bail Application Nos. 22602 of 2024, vide order dated 06.09.2024. The applicant is languishing in jail since 12.05.2024.

Heard Sri Sushil Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri R.K. Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material on record. The present bail application has been filed on behalf of applicant Najim under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, with a prayer to enlarge him on bail in Case Crime No. 223 of 2024 for offence punishable under Sections 2/3 of U.P. Gangsters and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, registered at Police Station- Kotwali Nagar, District- Muzaffarnagar, during pendency of the trial, after rejecting the bail application of the applicant by Additional Sessions Judge/Special Judge (Gangsters Act), Court No. 5, Muzaffarnagar vide order dated 16.09.2024. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. It is further submitted that the gang chart as shown has not been prepared after complying the mandatory provision of rule 5(3)(c)(e) of U.P. Gangsters & Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Rules, 2021. The gang chart has been signed on different dates, which clearly shows that gang chart has not been prepared as per rule. It is further submitted that applicant has criminal history of 23 other cases including the cases of Gang-chart. It is further submitted that the applicant explained the criminal history of 23 other cases in paragraph 3 of the supplementary affidavit in tabular form in chronological order. It is further submitted that eight cases are related to U.P. Prevention of Cow Slaughter Act, which are related to the years 2012, 2015, 2016, 2018, 2023 and 2024. It is further submitted that in all cases, applicant is granted bail. It is further submitted that there is no pre-summoning evidence or inquiry was made against the applicant for property which is alleged to have been gained by the aforesaid criminal history. It is further submitted that there is no pre-summoning evidence with regard to the fact that the applicant has run any gang or a gang leader as defined in the Act. It is next contended that applicant is neither a member of any gang nor a gang leader and he is not indulged in any anti-social activities as alleged by the prosecution in the first information report. It is further submitted that there is no other evidence with regard to tampering the evidence in the pending cases. It is further submitted that the provisions of the Act have been ill- used by the Police in order to perpetuate the detention of the applicant in jail anyhow even though the offence under the aforesaid Act is not made out. It is also submitted that the applicant is not a gangster and has never acted or conducted himself as such. Learned counsel for the applicant has also tried to demonstrate that the alleged previous offences which are said to have been committed by the applicant can at the most be said to be stray incident of breach of law having no nexus with the definition of a gangster as has been provided in the Act. Learned counsel for the applicant further urged that the F.I.R. in question has been lodged without containing the facts that the applicant is a member of gang as provided in the Act. It is further submitted that other co-accused Tanveer, Haneef, Kaleem, Ikram, Rashid, Shahzad, Gayyur, Nawab have already been granted bail by this court as well as co-ordinate Benches of this Court in Criminal Misc. Bail Application Nos. 20941 of 2024, 24040 of 2024, 21129 of 2024, 21470 of 2024, 20508 of 2024, 21212 of 2024, 20871 of 2024 and 23278 of 2024 vide order dated 29.05.2024, 26.06.2024, 29.5.2024, 31.05.2024, 31.5.2024, 30.05.2024, 13.06.2024 and 16.07.2024 respectively. It is further submitted that other co-accused Manawwar Alias Bholu, having similar role has already been granted bail by this court in Criminal Misc. Bail Application Nos. 22602 of 2024, vide order dated 06.09.2024. The applicant is languishing in jail since 12.05.2024.