Back
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
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.
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.
The court considered the applicant's previous bail grants and the release of the co-accused in the instant case as factors warranting the grant of bail under the U.P. Gangsters and Anti-Social Activi....
The consideration of the status of co-accused in similar roles in determining the eligibility for bail.
The court considered the similar bail granted to co-accused and the provisions of the Uttar Pradesh Gangsters and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, in granting bail to the applicant.
The court's decision is based on the lack of material against the applicant and the related bail status, leading to the conclusion that the case is fit for bail under the Uttar Pradesh Gangster and A....
The court established that prior bail grants and the nature of allegations must be critically assessed to determine the necessity of continued detention under anti-social activity laws.
The court established that prior bail grants in related cases and the absence of flight risk or witness tampering are significant factors in determining eligibility for bail under the Uttar Pradesh G....
The court considered the bail granted to co-accused with a similar role as a significant factor in deciding to grant bail to the applicants.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
