Allahabad High Court
Nayeem @ Pintu vs State Of U.P. on 29 June, 2022
Bench: Vikas Budhwar
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 43
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 22339 of 2022
Applicant :- Nayeem @ Pintu
Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Mohammad Zakir
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Vikas Budhwar,J.
Heard Sri Mohammad Zakir, learned counsel for the applicant, and Sri I.P. Srivastava, learned AGA for the State.
This bail application purported to be under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C. has been moved on behalf of the applicant, Nayeem @ Pintu for seeking bail in Case Crime No. 82 of 2022 under Sections 2/3 U.P. Gangster Act and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 registered at Police Station- Kotwali Nagar, District- Bulandshahr.
The bail application of the applicant has been rejected by the court below, on 13.05.2022.
The learned counsel for the applicant has has drawn the attention of the Court towards page no. 17 of the bail application so as to contend that in the gang chart there are two cases shown to be pending one is being case crime no. 94 of 2020, u/s 379, 411 IPC in which he has been enlarged on bail by the court below on 24.03.2021 as well as in case crime no. 258/2021, u/s 411, 414, 420 IPC in which he has been enlarged on bail 19.03.2021. Additionally in another case being case crime no. 261/2021 u/s 3/25 Arms Act the applicant stands bailed out on 23.03.2021. Learned counsel for the applicant has forwarded a copy of the set of the orders wherein case crime no. 1186/2017, u/s 323, 506 IPC the applicant stands bailed out on 02.05.2019 followed by case crime no. 173/799/2014 u/s 394 and 323 IPC he stands bailed out on 06.01.2015 as well as case crime no. 800/2014, u/s 356, 379, 120-B IPC he has been granted bail on 03.02.2015 in Crl. Misc. Bail Application No. 3745 of 2015 followed by case crime no. 296 of 2014 u/s 392 IPC he stands bailed out by court below on 28.01.2015. According to learned counsel for the applicant he is unnecessary languishing in jail since 06.05.2022 and the invocation of the provisions under the Gangster Act is thoroughly impermissible.
Countering the said submission learned AGA for the State has opposed the bail, however he could not dispute the narration of the details of the criminal history of the applicant as sought to be argued and also forwarded in the set of the papers which run into six pages.
The set of the judgments so forwarded by the learned counsel for the applicant is kept on record.
Considering the submission so advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, on the question of bail, prima facie this Court finds that this is a fit case for grant of bail as the criminal history of the applicant have been satisfactorily explained and looking into the nature of the acquisition, the evidence collected by the I.O. in support of the charge, gravity of offence, nature and severity of the punishment in the case of conviction, complicity of accused and all attending circumstances.
Courts have taken notice of the overcrowding of jails during the current pandemic situation (Ref.: Suo Motu Writ Petition (c) No. 1/2020, Contagion of COVID 19 Virus in prisons before the Supreme Court of India). These circumstances shall also be factored in while considering bail applications on behalf of accused persons.
In the light of the aforenoted discussion and without making any observations on the merits of the case, the bail application is allowed.
Let the applicant Nayeem @ Pintu involved in aforesaid crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions that :-
(i). The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/ pressurizing the witnesses, during the investigation or trial.
(ii). The applicant shall cooperate in the trial sincerely without seeking any adjournment.
(iii). The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail.
(iv). 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 to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.
(v). In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.
(vi). Identity, status and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted.
In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. Any observations made in granting bail to the applicant shall not in any way affect the learned Trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses.
Order Date :- 29.6.2022
Nisha
