Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2015 DIGILAW 1258 (ALL)

Ramesh @ Pappu Soankar v. State of U. P.

2015-05-15

BRIJESH KUMAR SRIVASTAVA II

body2015
JUDGMENT Brijesh Kumar Srivastava-II, J. Supplementary affidavit filed on behalf of the applicant is taken on record. 2. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. and perused the record. 3. This bail application has been preferred by the accused- applicant- Ramesh @ Pappu Soankar, who is involved in case crime no. 139 of 2015, under sections 2/3 U.P. Gangsters and Anti- Social Activities (Prevention) Act, Police Station- Kotwali Nagar, District- Sultanpur. 4. Gang chart has been annexed on page no. 13 of the affidavit. One case has been shown against the accused-applicant in this gang chart. Second gang chart has also been annexed on page no. 11 in supplementary affidavit. Three cases have been shown against the accused-applicant in the gang chart. The applicant has been granted bail by the learned lower court in all the cases. Their bail orders have been annexed as Annexure No. 3 and S.A.-2, S.A.-3 and S.A.-4 in the supplementary affidavit. It has also been submitted that the applicant is not involved in any anti social activities. 5. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail. Considering and keeping in mind the nature of accusations, the nature of evidence in support thereof, the severity of punishment which conviction will entail, the character of the accused-applicant, 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 and other circumstances, but without expressing any opinion on the merits, I am of the view that it is a fit case for grant of bail. 6. Let applicant ? Ramesh @ Pappu Soankar be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on his furnishing personal bond and two heavy sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions : 1.The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence and 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. 2.The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. 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. 2.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. 3.In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail 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. 4.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 default of this condition is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of his bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.