IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
Vikram D. Chauhan, J.
Sharzad Alias Shahzad – Applicant
Versus
State of U.P. – Opposite Party
Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. - 51443 of 2023
Decided On : 07-12-2023
Bail Application - U.P. Gangster and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 - Section 3(1) - Summary: The court considered the invocation of the Gangster Act against the applicant based on one criminal case and the lack of evidence to demonstrate the applicant's association with a gang. It emphasized that mere pendency of a criminal case may not automatically invoke the provisions of the Act. The court also highlighted the procedural requirements for initiating proceedings under the Gangster Act and concluded that the applicant had made out a case for bail.
Fact of the Case:
The applicant sought bail under the U.P. Gangster and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, based on the contention that he was not a gang leader, organizer, or member and that the allegations in the first information report were vague.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the applicant had been implicated based on one criminal case detailed in the gang chart, for which he had already been granted bail. It also noted the absence of evidence to demonstrate the applicant's association with a gang, and the lack of inclusion of other criminal history in the gang chart.
Issues: The issues revolved around the applicability of the Gangster Act to the applicant, the procedural requirements for invoking the Act, and the grounds for granting bail.
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was based on the lack of evidence to establish the applicant's association with a gang, the procedural requirements for initiating proceedings under the Gangster Act, and the fact that the applicant had already been enlarged on bail in the case shown in the gang chart.
Final Decision: The bail application was allowed, and the applicant was ordered to be released on bail subject to specified conditions.
JUDGMENT :
1. Learned A.G.A. submits that instructions have been received and has no objection in case the bail application is heard on merits.
2. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
3. It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that there is only one case shown in the gang chart against applicant, in which case he is already on bail, the bail order is annexed as Annexure no. 3 to the affidavit. It is also submitted that other criminal history of the applicant has been explained in paragraph 10 of the affidavit. It is the submission of learned counsel for the applicant that applicant neither the gang leader or organizer or member of the gang and the provision of Gangster Act may not be applicable in the facts and circumstances of the case. Applicant is languishing in jail since 02.11.2023 and in case he is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in the trial. In the first information report, the allegations are vague in nature and no specific instance to the effect that the applicant is member or leader or organizer of a Gang has been disclosed and as such the factual foundation under the Gangster Act is not available.
4. Learned A.G.A. for the State has opposed the prayer for bail but does not dispute the factual matrix of the case.
5. Having heard learned counsel for the parties, it is evident that the provision of Gangster Act has been invoked against the applicant on the basis of one criminal case. However, applicant has been released on bail in the aforesaid cases. Learned A.G.A. has not produced any material to demonstrate that the applicant comes within the definition of "Gangster" and "Gang" under U.P. Gangsters and Antisocial Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986. Mere pendency of criminal case may not ipso facto invoke provisions of U.P. Act No.7 of 1986. Criminal history of the applicant has been adequately explained.
6. The applicant in the present case has been implicated on the basis of the criminal case detailed in the gang chart. It is not in dispute by learned A.G.A. that the applicant has already been enlarged on bail in the criminal case showing in the gang chart. Once the applicant has been enlarged on bail in previous criminal case shown in the gang chart which forms the foundation for lodging of the criminal case under the Gangster Act. This Court see no valid ground to detain the applicant in custody once the applicant has already been enlarged on bail in the case shown in the gang chart.
7. There are one case shown in the gang chart against the applicant. However, other criminal history (apart from the gang chart) has been pointed out by learned A.G.A. The other criminal cases of the applicant has not been shown in the gang chart. No reasons have been shown by learned A.G.A. for non-inclusion of other criminal history in the gang chart. A separate list of criminal history, in Form No.4, is not attached with the gang chart detailing all the criminal activities of the gang and mentioning all the criminal cases nor abovementioned Form No.4 has been produced by learned A.G.A. before this Court. No material has been placed by learned A.G.A. to demonstrate that the name of the Applicant is entered into gang register kept in the police station concerned. The proceedings under the Gangster Act is required to be initiated by preparation of gang chart mentioning the criminal activities. It is not shown by learned A.G.A. that the details of other criminal cases against the applicant were before the authorities concerned at the time of approval of gang chart. To initiate under the Gangster Act preparation of gang chart is a condition precedent under Rule 5(1) of the Uttar Pradesh Gangster and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Rules, 2021. The gang chart is required to mention details of the criminal activity of the accused. The Commissioner of Police/District Magistrate is to record satisfaction on the basis of the gang c
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the mere pendency of a criminal case may not automatically invoke the provisions of the U.P. Gangster and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) ....
Grant of Bail - There is no apprehension that, if the facility of bail is granted to the applicant, he may flee from the course of law or he will not appear before the Court below.
The grant of bail was based on the lack of valid grounds for detention and the applicant's previous bail orders.
Bail under the U.P. Gangster Act requires proof of non-guilt and assurance against re-offending; extensive criminal history negates bail eligibility.
Vague allegations in an F.I.R. under the Gangsters Act do not justify denial of bail; reasonable grounds for believing the applicant is not guilty warrant bail.
The court emphasized the balance between individual liberty and societal safety in granting bail under certain conditions as established in statutory law and precedent.
The court considered the absence of criminal history apart from the case shown in the gang chart and the undertaking of the applicant not to misuse the liberty of bail as grounds for allowing the bai....
The court established that vague allegations in an F.I.R. are insufficient to invoke the provisions of the Gangsters Act, emphasizing the need for specific acts or omissions to substantiate charges.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.