Naim vs State Of U.P.
2016 Latest Caselaw 6552 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
 
 

?Court No. - 13
 

 
Case :- BAIL No. - 8973 of 2016
 

 
Applicant :- Naim
 
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
 
Counsel for Applicant :- Wasim Ahmad
 
Counsel for Opposite Party :- Govt. Advocate
 

 
Hon'ble Mrs. Ranjana Pandya,J.

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned Additional Government Advocate for the State.

It has been argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that only two cases pertaining to case crime Nos. 88 of 2015 and 96 of 2012 has been shown in the gang chart, in which the accused-applicant is on bail. Copy of bail orders have been filed as Annexure Nos. 1 and 2 to to the bail application respectively.

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail without disputing this fact that applicant is on bail in the crime shown in the gang chart.

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I find it a fit case for bail.

Let the applicant Naim involved in Case Crime No. 309 of 2016, under section 2/3 of UP Gangsters and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, Police Station Mahmoodabad, District Sitapur, be released on bail on his executing a personal bond and furnishing two local sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned and also subject to the following conditions:

(i) 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.

(ii) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.

(iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial 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.

(iv) 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 applicant 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 him in accordance with law.

Order Date :- 19.10.2016

kanhaiya