High Court · 2025
Case Details
Acts & Sections
Cited in this judgment
Heard Sri Amit Kumar, learned counsel for the applicant, Shri Hari Shanker Bajpai, learned A.G.A.-I for the State and perused the record. The applicant has moved the present bail application seeking bail in Case Crime No.23/2025, under Section 2(b)(xvii)/3 of U.P. Gangster and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, Police Station Haidrabad, District Lakhimpur Kheri. Learned counsel for the applicant has filed a supplementary affidavit today in the Court, which is taken on record. The chief plank of the submissions made on behalf of accused is that only on the basis of one case, which has been made the basis to impose the provisions of Gangster Act against the accused, in which the applicant has already been granted bail, copy of which has been filed as Annexure No. 3 of the affidavit filed in support of the bail application, 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. Further submission is that the applicant is not a gangster and has never acted or conducted himself as such. 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. Further submission is that as it has been mentioned in paragraph-7 of the affidavit filed in support of the bail application that the applicant has already been released on bail in the case on the basis of which the provisions of the Act were imposed, it shall not be much justified to continue the incarceration of the applicant. Submission is also that the applicant is not guilty of having committed any offence under the Gangster Act. Counsel for the applicant further submits that the applicant is having criminal history of five cases apart from the instant case and in four of them, he has been enlarged on bail by the competent Court whereas in one case, i.e. Case Crime No.269/2018, under Sections 3/5/8 of The U.P. Prevention of Cow Slaughter Act, Police Station Neemgaon, District Lakhimpur, stay has been granted by a Division Bench of this Court. Several other submissions regarding legality and illegality of the allegations made in the F.I.R. have also been placed forth before the Court. The circumstances which, according to the counsel, led to the false implication of the accused, have also been touched upon at length. It has been assured on behalf of the applicant that he is ready to cooperate with the process of law and shall faithfully make himself available before the court whenever required and is also ready to accept all the conditions which the Court may deem fit to impose upon him. The applicant undertakes that in case he is released on bail he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in trial. It has also been pointed out that the applicant is in jail since 04.02.2025 and that in the wake of heavy pendency of cases in the courts, there is no likelihood of any early conclusion of trial. Learned A.G.A.-I has opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the fact of applicant having been released on bail in the criminal case which has been shown to be the basis of imposing the provisions of the Act. After perusing the record in the light of the submissions made at the Bar and after taking an overall view of all the facts and circumstances of this case, the nature of evidence, the period of detention already undergone, the unlikelihood of early conclusion of trial and also the absence of any convincing material to indicate the possibility of tampering with the evidence and considering the larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India and the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh vs. State of U.P. and another, reported in (2018) 3 SCC 22, this Court is of the view that the applicant may be enlarged on bail. The prayer for bail is granted. The application is allowed. Let the applicant, Salman, involved in Case Crime No.23/2025, under Section 2(b)(xvii)/3 of U.P. Gangster and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, Police Station Haidrabad, District Lakhimpur Kheri, be enlarged on bail on his executing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned on the following conditions :- (1) The applicant will not make any attempt to tamper with the prosecution evidence in any manner whatsoever. (2) The applicant will personally appear on each and every date fixed in the court below and his personal presence shall not be exempted unless the court itself deems it fit to do so in the interest of justice. (3) The applicant shall cooperate in the trial sincerely without seeking any adjournment. (4) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail. (5) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. 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 174-A of the Indian Penal Code. (6) 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 under Section 313 Cr.P.C. If in the opinion of the trial court default of this condition is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of his bail and proceed against him in accordance with law. It may be observed that in the event of any breach of the aforesaid conditions, the court below shall be at liberty to proceed for the cancellation of applicant's bail. It is clarified that the observations, if any, made in this order are strictly confined to the disposal of the bail application and must not be construed to have any reflection on the ultimate merit of the case. Order Date :- 21.2.2025/Saurabh (Om Prakash Shukla,J.) SAURABH VERMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench
Heard Sri Amit Kumar, learned counsel for the applicant, Shri Hari Shanker Bajpai, learned A.G.A.-I for the State and perused the record. The applicant has moved the present bail application seeking bail in Case Crime No.23/2025, under Section 2(b)(xvii)/3 of U.P. Gangster and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, Police Station Haidrabad, District Lakhimpur Kheri. Learned counsel for the applicant has filed a supplementary affidavit today in the Court, which is taken on record. The chief plank of the submissions made on behalf of accused is that only on the basis of one case, which has been made the basis to impose the provisions of Gangster Act against the accused, in which the applicant has already been granted bail, copy of which has been filed as Annexure No. 3 of the affidavit filed in support of the bail application, 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. Further submission is that the applicant is not a gangster and has never acted or conducted himself as such. 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. Further submission is that as it has been mentioned in paragraph-7 of the affidavit filed in support of the bail application that the applicant has already been released on bail in the case on the basis of which the provisions of the Act were imposed, it shall not be much justified to continue the incarceration of the applicant. Submission is also that the applicant is not guilty of having committed any offence under the Gangster Act. Counsel for the applicant further submits that the applicant is having criminal history of five cases apart from the instant case and in four of them, he has been enlarged on bail by the competent Court whereas in one case, i.e. Case Crime No.269/2018, under Sections 3/5/8 of The U.P. Prevention of Cow Slaughter Act, Police Station Neemgaon, District Lakhimpur, stay has been granted by a Division Bench of this Court. Several other submissions regarding legality and illegality of the allegations made in the F.I.R. have also been placed forth before the Court. The circumstances which, according to the counsel, led to the false implication of the accused, have also been touched upon at length. It has been assured on behalf of the applicant that he is ready to cooperate with the process of law and shall faithfully make himself available before the court whenever required and is also ready to accept all the conditions which the Court may deem fit to impose upon him. The applicant undertakes that in case he is released on bail he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in trial. It has also been pointed out that the applicant is in jail since 04.02.2025 and that in the wake of heavy pendency of cases in the courts, there is no likelihood of any early conclusion of trial. Learned A.G.A.-I has opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the fact of applicant having been released on bail in the criminal case which has been shown to be the basis of imposing the provisions of the Act. After perusing the record in the light of the submissions made at the Bar and after taking an overall view of all the facts and circumstances of this case, the nature of evidence, the period of detention already undergone, the unlikelihood of early conclusion of trial and also the absence of any convincing material to indicate the possibility of tampering with the evidence and considering the larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India and the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh vs. State of U.P. and another, reported in (2018) 3 SCC 22, this Court is of the view that the applicant may be enlarged on bail. The prayer for bail is granted. The application is allowed. Let the applicant, Salman, involved in Case Crime No.23/2025, under Section 2(b)(xvii)/3 of U.P. Gangster and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, Police Station Haidrabad, District Lakhimpur Kheri, be enlarged on bail on his executing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned on the following conditions :- (1) The applicant will not make any attempt to tamper with the prosecution evidence in any manner whatsoever. (2) The applicant will personally appear on each and every date fixed in the court below and his personal presence shall not be exempted unless the court itself deems it fit to do so in the interest of justice. (3) The applicant shall cooperate in the trial sincerely without seeking any adjournment. (4) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail. (5) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. 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 174-A of the Indian Penal Code. (6) 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 under Section 313 Cr.P.C. If in the opinion of the trial court default of this condition is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of his bail and proceed against him in accordance with law. It may be observed that in the event of any breach of the aforesaid conditions, the court below shall be at liberty to proceed for the cancellation of applicant's bail. It is clarified that the observations, if any, made in this order are strictly confined to the disposal of the bail application and must not be construed to have any reflection on the ultimate merit of the case. Order Date :- 21.2.2025/Saurabh (Om Prakash Shukla,J.) SAURABH VERMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench