Thursday, 07, May, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

Samshad vs State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.
2025 Latest Caselaw 111 ALL

Citation : 2025 Latest Caselaw 111 ALL
Judgement Date : 1 April, 2025

Allahabad High Court

Samshad vs State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. on 1 April, 2025

Author: Manish Mathur
Bench: Manish Mathur




HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
 
 


?Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:17917
 
Court No. - 13
 

 
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 2673 of 2025
 

 
Applicant :- Samshad
 
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.
 
Counsel for Applicant :- Ajeet Kumar Singh,Saurabh Verma
 
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
 

 
Hon'ble Manish Mathur,J.
 

1. Heard learned counsel for applicant, learned Additional Government Advocate appearing on behalf of State and perused the record.

2. This first bail application has been filed with regard to Case Crime No. 63 of 2025 , under Section 2/3 U. P. Gangster and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, P.S.- Maholi, District Sitapur.

3. It has been submitted that as per gang chart, applicant is shown involved in case crime No. 342 of 2024 under Sections 384 and 504 IPC in which he has already been enlarged on bail by trial court in C.I.S. No. 630 of 2025 dated 24th January, 2025.

4. It is submitted that apart from said case, the applicant is also shown involved in case crime No. 419 of 2017 under Sections 147, 148, 323, 504, and 506 IPC read with Section 3 of the SC/ST Act in which also he has been enlarged on bail in bail application No. 212 of 2022.

5. Learned A.G.A. appearing on behalf of the State opposed the prayer for bail but does not dispute the fact that applicant is involved only in aforesaid two cases in which he has already been enlarged on bail.

6. Hon'ble the Supreme Court in Sanjay Chandra v. Central Bureau of Investigation, reported in (2012) 1 SCC 40 has specifically held that bail is to be a norm and an under-trial is not required to be in jail for ever pending trial. Relevant paragraphs of the judgment are as under :-

"21. In bail applications, generally, it has been laid down from the earliest times that the object of bail is to secure the appearance of the accused person at his trial by reasonable amount of bail. The object of bail is neither punitive nor preventative. Deprivation of liberty must be considered a punishment, unless it is required to ensure that an accused person will stand his trial when called upon. The courts owe more than verbal respect to the principle that punishment begins after conviction, and that every man is deemed to be innocent until duly tried and duly found guilty."

"27. This Court, time and again, has stated that bail is the rule and committal to jail an exception. It has also observed that refusal of bail is a restriction on the personal liberty of the individual guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution."

7. Upon consideration of submissions advanced by learned counsel for parties and upon perusal of material available on record, prima facie, and subject to further evidence being led in trial, it appears that applicant has already been enlarged on bail in all the cases filed against him as averred in the affidavit filed in support of the application and therefore conditions indicated in Section 19(4) of U. P. Gangster and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 stand complied with at this stage, therefore the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case.

8. Accordingly bail application is allowed.

9. Let applicant Samshad involved in the aforesaid case 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 which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-

(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 269 of Bharatiya Nayay Sanhita, 2023 (BNS).

(iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 84 of Bharatiya Nayay Sanhita, 2023 (BNS) 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 209 of Bharatiya Nayay Sanhita, 2023 (BNS).

(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 351 of Bharatiya Nayay Sanhita, 2023 (BNS). 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 :- 1.4.2025

prabhat

 

 

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : IJJ

 

LatestLaws Partner Event : Smt. Nirmala Devi Bam Memorial International Moot Court Competition

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter