Allahabad High Court
Subhani vs State Of U.P. on 28 August, 2020
Author: Sunita Agarwal
Bench: Sunita Agarwal
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Court No. - 34 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 22582 of 2020 Applicant :- Subhani Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Sunil Kumar Dwivedi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Mrs. Sunita Agarwal,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned A.G.A. for the State.
The present bail application has been filed by the applicant in Case Crime No.256 of 2019 under Sections 2/3 of U.P. Gangster and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act' 1986, Police Station- Khurja Dehat, District- Bulandshahar.
The applicant herein has been implicated under Section 2/3 of Gangster Act on account of two criminal cases lodged against him under the Cow Slaughter Act. In both the cases the applicant has been enlarged on bail by this Court as well as by the court below vide order dated 02.07.2019 and 17.09.2020. It is contended that the implication of the applicant under the Gangster Act is an illegal exercise on the part of the officials in as much as, it cannot be said that the applicant is a member of a gang who had indulged in any previous crime within the meaning of Section 2(b) of the Gangster Act' 1986 with the object of gaining any undue temporal, pecuniary, material or other advantage for himself or any other person or indulge in anti-social activities. The applicant is languishing in jail since 30.09.2019.
Learned A.G.A., however, opposed the prayer for bail.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case as also the submissions made, without expressing any opinion as to the merits of the case, this Court is of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail.
Let applicant- Subhani be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on his furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following additional conditions, which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-
(i) The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence or threaten the witnesses;
(ii) 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;
(iii) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through their counsel. In case of their absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against them under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code;
(iv) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure their presence, proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicants fail 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; and
(v) 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 absence of the applicants is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against them in accordance with law.
Order Date :- 28.8.2020 Himanshu