Back
2023 Supreme(UK) 43
IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
Ravindra Maithani, J.
Deepak Gupta - Appellant
Versus
State of Uttarakhand - Respondent
First Bail Application No. 213 of 2023
Decided On : 24-01-2023
Important Points
Subject
Criminal Law - Bail Proceedings
Act Referred
Headnote
Bail - U.P. Gangsters and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 - The court granted bail to the applicant, Deepak Gupta, who was in judicial custody under the U.P. Gangsters and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, after considering the applicant's previous bail grants and the release of the co-accused in the instant case.
Fact of the Case:
The applicant, Deepak Gupta, sought release on bail in a case under the U.P. Gangsters and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, where he was in judicial custody.
Finding of the Court:
The court, after hearing the arguments and considering the record, found that the applicant's previous bail grants and the release of the co-accused in the instant case warranted granting bail to the applicant.
Issues: The main issue was whether the applicant deserved to be enlarged on bail under the U.P. Gangsters and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986.
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was influenced by the applicant's previous bail grants and the release of the co-accused, leading to the conclusion that the case was fit for bail.
Final Decision: The bail application was allowed, and the applicant was ordered to be released on bail upon executing a personal bond and furnishing two reliable sureties.
Pradeep Chamyal, Advocate, Lalit Miglani, Advocate, Sangeeta Bhardwaj, Advocate
JUDGMENT
Ravindra Maithani, J. - Applicant-Deepak Gupta is in judicial custody in FIR No.130 of 2022, under Sections 2/3 of the U.P. Gangsters and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, Police Station Dineshpur, District Udham Singh Nagar. He has sought his release on bail.
2. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
3. It is argued that the applicant was earlier involved in some cases, in which, he has already been granted bail. The co-accused, in the instant case, has already been released on bail.
4. These facts are admitted by learned State Counsel.
5. Having considered, this Court is of the view that it is a case fit for bail. Accordingly, the applicant deserves to be enlarged on bail.
6. The bail application is allowed.
7. Let the applicant be released on bail, on his executing a personal bond and furnishing two reliable sureties, each of the like amount, to the satisfaction of the court concerned.
