Allahabad High Court
Anant Ram Yadav vs The State Of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. ... on 17 April, 2025
Author: Manish Mathur
Bench: Manish Mathur
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:21862
Court No. - 13
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 2008 of 2025
Applicant :- Anant Ram Yadav
Opposite Party :- The State Of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.
Counsel for Applicant :- Mohsin Iqbal,Syed Shabih Haider
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Manish Mathur,J.
1. Rejoinder affidavit filed today is taken on record.
2. Heard learned counsel for applicant and learned AGA appearing on behalf of State and perused on record.
3. This first bail application has been filed with regard to Case Crime No.27 of 2025, under Section 3(1) U.P. Gangsters and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, P.S. Nawabganj, District Gonda.
4. It is submitted that as per gang chart, applicant has been shown involved in two cases bearing Case Crime Nos. 303 of 2024 and 362 of 2023 in which applicant has been enlarged on bail by this Court in Bail Application No.13218 of 2024 and by trial court vide order dated 20.01.2024.
5. It is submitted that apart from the aforesaid two cases, the applicant is shown involved in 13 other cases in which he has been enlarged on bail which are as follows:
(i) Crime No.376 of 2006, under Section 382/506 IPC, applicant has been granted bail by trial court on 29.06.2007.
(ii) Case Crime No.403 of 2008, under Section 110(G) Cr.P.C., case was over and is not pending.
(iii) Case Crime No.261 of 2009, under Sections 394, 411 IPC and 3(1) U.P. Gangster Act, Police Station Nawabganj, District Gonda passed in Session Trail No.51 of 2010.
(iv) Case Crime No.262 of 2009, under Section 387 IPC, Police Station Nawabganj, District Gonda passed in Bail Application No.651 of 2009.
(v) Case Crime No.364 of 2009, under Section 307 IPC and 3/25 Arms Act, Police Station Nawabganj, District Gonda, the applicant has been acquitted on 16.07.2022.
(vi) Case Crime No.266 of 2009, under Section 3/25 Arms Act, the applicant has been acquitted on 16.07.2022.
(vii) Case Crime No.47 of 2010, under Sections 392, 411 IPC, the applicant has been acquitted on 24.08.2023.
(viii) Case Crime No.234 of 2008, under Sections 323, 504, 506 IPC, NCR.
(ix) Case Crime No.488/318 of 2007, under Section 3/25 Arms Act, the applicant has been acquitted on 22.03.2019.
(x) Case Crime No.17 of 2008, under Section 110(G) Cr.P.C..
(xi) Case Crime No.120 of 2014, under Section 110(G) Cr.P.C.
(xii) Case Crime No.34 of 2017, under Section 110(G) Cr.P.C.
(xiii) Case Crime No.75 of 2019, under Section 110(G) Cr.P.C.
6. It is submitted that no other case is pending against the applicant. It is further submitted that there is no possibility of the applicant of fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the witnesses. In case the applicant is enlarged on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail. The applicant is in jail since 05.12.2024.
7. Learned A.G.A. appearing on behalf of the State opposed the prayer for bail but does not dispute the fact that applicant has already been enlarged on bail in the aforesaid case in which his involvement has been indicated.
8. 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."
9. Upon consideration of submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties and perusal of material 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 application and therefore conditions indicated in Section 19(4) U.P. Gangsters 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.
10. Accordingly bail application is allowed.
11. Let applicant- Anant Ram Yadav 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 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 :- 17.4.2025
Subodh/-
