Allahabad High Court
Aditya @ Lai Singh vs State Of U.P. on 20 November, 2020
Author: Ravi Nath Tilhari
Bench: Ravi Nath Tilhari
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Court No. - 91 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 40400 of 2020 Applicant :- Aditya @ Lal Singh Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Pankaj Kumar Gupta Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Ravi Nath Tilhari,J.
Learned counsel for the applicant files supplementary affidavit which is taken on record.
Heard Sri Pankaj Kumar Gupta learned counsel for the applicant, Learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material on record.
This bail application has been filed by the applicant Aditya @ Lal Singh seeking enlargement on bail during trial in Case Crime No. 221 of 2020, registered under Section 3 (1) U.P. Gangster Act and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, registered at Police Station- Sajeti, District Kanpur Nagar.
The submission advanced by learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is further submitted that in the two cases, shown in the gang chart, which have been made the basis to impose the provisions of Gangster Act against the accused he has already been granted bail by this Court, in one case vide order annexed as Annexure no. 2 to the bail application and in other case vide order annexed as annexure no. SA-1 to the Supplementary affidavit. 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 justify the alleged previous offences which are said to have been committed by the applicant. Further submission is that as the applicant has already been released on bail in all the cases 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. The applicant has criminal history of one more case in which also he has been granted bail as mentioned in paragraph no. 3 of the supplementary affidavit vide order dated 05.10.2020 at page number 8 of the supplementary affidavit. 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. It has also been submitted that the applicant is languishing in jail since 17.04.2020.
Per contra, learned A.G.A. opposes the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid arguments as raised by the learned counsel for the applicant.
Considering the facts of the case and keeping in mind, the ratio of the Apex Court's judgment in the case of Dataram Singh Vs. State of U.P. and another, reported in (2018) 3 SCC 22, larger mandate of Article 21 of the Constitution of India, the nature of accusations, the nature of evidence in support thereof, the severity of punishment which conviction will entail, the circumstances which are peculiar to the accused, reasonable possibility of securing the presence of the accused at the trial, reasonable apprehension of the witnesses being tampered with, the larger interest of the public/State, but without expressing any opinion on the merits, I am of the view that it is a fit case for grant of bail.
The bail application is allowed.
Let the applicant Aditya @ Lal Singh 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 with the following conditions:
1. The applicant shall attend in accordance with the conditions of the bond executed under Chapter 33 Cr.P.C.
2. The applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which he is accused, or suspected, of the commission of which he is suspected;
3. That 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 him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.
4. The applicant shall cooperate in the trial sincerely without seeking any adjournment.
5. The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the date fixed for (i) opening of the case,(ii) framing of charging and recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C., unless the personal appearance of the applicant is exempted by the court below in which case the appearance shall be made through counsel. If in the opinion of trial absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such fault as abuse of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.
6. In case the applicant has been enlarged on short term bail as per the order of committee constituted under the orders of Hon'ble Supreme Court his bail shall be effective after the period of short-term bail comes to an end.
The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad.
The concerned Court/Authority/Official shall verify the authenticity of such computerized copy of the order from the official website of High Court Allahabad and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing.
In view of the extraordinary situation prevailing in the State due to Covid-19, the directions of this Court dated 6.4.2020 passed in Public Interest Litigation No. 564 of 2020 (In re vs. State of U.P.), shall also be complied.
The order reads thus:
"Looking to impediments in arranging sureties because of lockdown, while invoking powers under Article 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, we deem it appropriate to order that all the accused-applicants whose bail applications came to be allowed on or after 15th March, 2020 but have not been released due to non-availability of sureties as a consequence to lockdown may be released on executing personal bond as ordered by the Court or to the satisfaction of the jail authorities where such accused is imprisoned, provided the accused-applicants undertakes to furnish required sureties within a period of one month from the date of his/her actual release."
In case of breach of any of the above conditions it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.
Order Date :- 20.11.2020 Vikram