Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2021 DIGILAW 1508 (ALL)

Vimal Kamhaar (Second Bail) v. State of U. P.

2021-12-07

DINESH KUMAR SINGH

body2021
JUDGMENT : 1. This second application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. has been filed seeking bail in Case Crime No.005 of 2018, under Section 2/3 U.P. Gangsters Act, Police Station Raniganj, District Pratapgarh. 2. First bail was rejected by this Court vide order dated 23.3.2021 being Bail No.3546 of 2021. 3. There are two counsels, who present the accused-applicant, namely, Sri Komal Prasad Tiwari and Sri Pushkal Shukla. Sri Komal Prasad Tiwari has sent adjournment slip on the ground of him being out of station. There are two counsels and the order was passed for listing the matter today. However, when the case is being taken up, it has been brought to the notice of the Court that one of the two counsels has sought adjournment. This is the date fixed case and, if one counsel has gone out of station, second counsel should have remained present to argue the case. However, Sri Ashwani Kumar Singh, learned Additional Government Advocate is present. Therefore, the Court is proceeding to decide the case on merit. 4. This Court on 4.12.2021 passed the following order:- "On request of Mr. Ashwani Kumar Singh, learned Additional Government Advocate, let the matter be listed on Tuesday i.e. 07.12.2021. In the meantime, the learned A.G.A. will have instructions as to whether order dated 15.12.2020 passed in Criminal Appeal No.1646 of 2019, grating bail to the accused-applicant in Crime No.068 of 2017, under Sections 302, 201, 120-B/34 IPC read with Section 3(2) (V) SC/ST Act, lodged at Police Station Raniganj, District Pratapgarh was challenged before the Supreme Court or not." 5. Sri Ashwani Kumar Singh, learned Additional Government Advocate submits that order dated 15.12.2020 passed in Criminal Appeal No.1646 of 2019 granting bail to the present accused-applicant in Crime No.068 of 2017, under Sections 302, 201, 120-B/34 IPC read with Section 3(2)(V) SC/ST Act, Police Station Raniganj, District Pratapgarh has not been challenged before the Supreme Court. However, he is giving opinion to the Law Department for filing the Special Leave Petition against the said order. 6. First bail was rejected by this Court considering the heinous criminal history of the accused-applicant of two murders cases. The second murder was plotted by the accused-applicant while he was in jail in Case Crime No.138 of 2017. However, he is giving opinion to the Law Department for filing the Special Leave Petition against the said order. 6. First bail was rejected by this Court considering the heinous criminal history of the accused-applicant of two murders cases. The second murder was plotted by the accused-applicant while he was in jail in Case Crime No.138 of 2017. This Court after considering the criminal history of the heinous cases of murder allegedly committed by the accused-applicant and provisions of Section 19(4) of the U.P. Gangsters Act, rejected the bail application of the accused-applicant. There is no fresh ground available for enlarging the accused-applicant on bail. 7. Accordingly, second bail application is rejected.