Allahabad High Court
Rinku @ Sumit vs State Of U.P. on 22 June, 2021
Author: Sanjay Kumar Singh
Bench: Sanjay Kumar Singh
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Court No. - 72 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 11768 of 2021 Applicant :- Rinku @ Sumit Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Narendra Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Sanjay Kumar Singh,J.
Keeping in view the pandemic (COVID-19), the Court is functioning in virtual mode under the orders dated 15.6.2021 of Hon'ble the Chief Justice.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned Additional Government Advocate representing the State via video conferencing and perused the record of the case.
The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant, Rinku @ Sumit with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 257 of 2020, under Section 2/3 U.P. Gangsters and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, police station Kurrah, district Mainpuri during the pendency of trial.
It is argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that according to the gang chart the applicant is said to have been involved in three criminal cases, in which he has already been enlarged on bail by the court concerned and the copies of the same have been annexed as annexure Nos. 3 to 5 to the application. Learned counsel for the applicant also argued that the applicant has falsely been implicated in the present case due to police rivalry. He is not a member of any gang. There is no prospect of trial of the present case being concluded in near future due to heavy dockets. The applicant is languishing in jail since 4.11.2020 and in case he is enlarged on bail he will not misuse the liberty of bail.
Per contra, learned Additional Government Advocate vehemently opposed the prayer for bail by contending that the applicant is a member of gang and habitual of committing crime and also contended that in addition to the three cases shown in the gang chart, the applicant has a criminal antecedents of fifteen cases to his credit and the same has not been disclosed by the learned counsel for the applicant in the application. It is further contended that in all likelihood the release of the accused shall impair the prospects of a fair trial. It is next contended that it is also very obvious that a person of this criminal background is also very likely to indulge himself in the activities which shall be detrimental to the society at large.
The details of the criminal antecedents of the applicant, which were sent by the District Crime Records Bureau, Mainpuri to the learned Additional Government Advocate, are as follows.
1. Case Crime No. 56 of 2014, under Sections 147, 148, 149 and 307 IPC, police station Karhal, Mainpuri.
2. Case Crime No. 58 of 2014, under Sections 25 Arms Act, police station Karhal, Mainpuri.
3. Case Crime No. 94 of 2014, under Sections 41/10 Cr.P.C. and 342/411 IPC, police station Aucha, Mainpuri.
4. Case Crime No. 201 of 2014, under Sections 2/3 Gangsters Act, police station Karhal, Mainpuri.
5. Case Crime No. 12 of 2018, under Sections 392 IPC, police station Aucha, Mainpuri.
6. Case Crime No. 31 of 2015, under Sections 147, 148, 323, 354, 452, 504 and 506 IPC, police station Kurra, Mainpuri.
7. Case Crime No. 43 of 2018, under Sections 394 IPC, police station Kurra, Mainpuri.
8. Case Crime No. 46 of 2018, under Sections 147, 148, 149 IPC, police station Kurra, Mainpuri.
9. Case Crime No. 47 of 2018, under Sections 25 Arms Act, police station Kurra, Mainpuri.
10. Case Crime No. 41 of 2015, under Sections 2/3 Gangsters Act, police station Ghiror, Mainpuri.
11. Case Crime No. 95 of 2019, under Sections 342 and 392 IPC, police station Baiber, Mainpuri.
12. Case Crime No. 314 of 2019, under Section 2/3 Gangsters Act, police station Baiber, Mainpuri.
13. Case Crime No. 170 of 2020, under Sections 3/25/27 Arms Act, police station Kurra, Mainpuri.
14. Case Crime No. 161 of 2015, under Sections 307, 504 and 506 IPC, police station Karhal, Mainpuri.
15. Case Crime No. 48 of 2019, under Sections 41 and 102 Cr.P.C., police station Binchawa, Mainpuri.
Having considered the aforesaid facts as pointed out by the learned Additional Government Advocate that the applicant is having a long criminal history of 15 cases except the cases shown in the gang chart, whereas in paragraph No. 10 of the affidavit filed in support of the bail application it is mentioned that "except the present case no other criminal case has been lodged against the applicant", and as such, criminal history of the applicant has been suppressed and the applicant has approached this Court with unclean hands by concealing the material facts, without recording any finding on merit, I do not find any good ground to release the applicant on bail.
The application for bail is hereby rejected.
Order Date :- 22.6.2021 Sumaira