Virendra Yadav v. State of U.P

Court No. - 74 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 35839 of 2023 Applicant :- Virendra Yadav Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Vinod Kumar Tirpathi,Mohit Kumar Tiwari,Nimesh Kumar Shukla,P.K. Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Vivek Varma,J.

¶1Copy of gang chart as well as counter affidavit filed by learned AGA and second supplementary affidavit filed by the counsel for the applicant, are taken on record.

¶2Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as Sri Neeraj Kumar Sharma, learned A.G.A. for the State of U.P. and perused the record.

¶3The instant bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. has been filed with the prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 335 of 2023, under Section 3(1) of the U.P. Gangsters and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, Police Station Line Bazar, District Jaunpur, during the pendency of the trial.

¶4Learned counsel for the applicant submits that according to the gang chart, ten cases are shown against the applicant and in the said cases the applicant has been enlarged on bail. It is next contended that apart from the cases mentioned in the gang chart, the applicant is involved in another case. In the said case also he has been enlarged on bail. Further, the co-accused Amit Singh @ Jugnu Singh has also been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 02.11.2023 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 46617 of 2023.

¶5He further submits that in the F.I.R., in issue, the allegations with regard to disturbing the public order, as also regarding gaining undue temporal, pecuniary, material or other advantage of like nature against the applicant are vague. In absence of allegation concerning an act or omission on the part of an accused, covered by the definition of terms "gang" and "gangster" as provided under Section 2 of the Gangsters Act, no F.I.R. is maintainable. In the instant case, the F.I.R. is based upon the pending criminal cases and not upon any new allegations or discovery of facts having serious reflection on the society, for which purpose the Gangsters Act was enacted.

¶6It is also submitted that considering the facts of the case, as stated above, there are reasonable grounds for believing that the applicant is not guilty of the offence under the Gangsters Act and that he would not commit the offence while on bail nor would try to tamper the evidence or influence the witnesses in any manner whatsoever it may be. The applicant is in jail since

10.07.2023.

¶7Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail but could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions from the record.

¶8Considering the rival submissions of learned counsel for parties, material available on record as well as taking note of Section 19(4)(b) of the Gangsters Act, in light of the submission of counsel for the applicant to the effect that while on bail in this case, the applicant would not commit any crime/offence nor would try to tamper the evidence or influence the witnesses in any manner, whatsoever it may be, and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I am of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed.

¶9Let the applicant-Virendra Yadav, involved in the aforesaid case, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two heavy sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of court concerned on the following conditions that:

(i) the applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence;

(ii) the applicant shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses; and,

(iii) the applicant shall appear on each and every date fixed by the trial court.

¶10In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move bail cancellation application before this Court. Order Date :- 30.11.2023 Lbm/- High Court of Judicature at Allahabad