Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
Ravindra Maithani, J.
Rizwan - Appellant
Versus
State of Uttarakhand - Respondent
First Bail Application No. 178 of 2023
Decided On : 19-01-2023
Bail - Uttar Pradesh Gangster and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 - Applicant seeks release on bail under Sections 2/3 of the Act
Fact of the Case:
Applicant seeks release on bail under Sections 2/3 of the Uttar Pradesh Gangster and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, in judicial custody in FIR/Case Crime No.923 of 2022
Finding of the Court:
Court finds that the applicant has been implicated in the case based on a case under Section 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, in which the applicant is already on bail, and there is no material against the applicant. Court concludes that it is a case fit for bail and allows the bail application, ordering the release of the applicant on bail.
Issues: Implication of the applicant in the case, material against the applicant, fit for bail
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision is influenced by the lack of material against the applicant and the fact that the applicant is already on bail in a related case, leading to the conclusion that the case is fit for bail under the Uttar Pradesh Gangster and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986.
Final Decision: The bail application is allowed, and the applicant is ordered to be released on bail upon executing a personal bond and furnishing two reliable sureties to the satisfaction of the court concerned.
JUDGMENT
Ravindra Maithani, J. - Applicant-Rizwan is in judicial custody in FIR/Case Crime No.923 of 2022, under Sections 2/3 of the Uttar Pradesh Gangster and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, Police Station Bhagwanpur, District Haridwar. He has sought his release on bail.
2. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. Learned counsel for the applicant appeared through video conferencing.
3. It is argued that the applicant has been implicated in the case, based on a case under Section 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, in which the applicant has already on bail. There is no material against the applicant.
4. These facts are not disputed 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 decision emphasized the importance of considering the entirety of facts and the lack of substantial evidence against the applicant in granting bail.
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 prolonged detention without trial and lack of witness examination can justify the granting of bail, even in serious narcotic cases, under the provisions of the Narcotic Dru....
Possession of less than commercial quantity of narcotics can be a factor in granting bail under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985.
The court established that while Section 37 of the Narcotic Drugs & Psychotropic Substances Act imposes strict conditions for bail, the right to a timely trial is paramount, and undue delay in procee....
The absence of previous conviction, the quantity of the recovered substance, and the presence of independent witnesses are crucial factors in determining bail under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropi....
The court's discretion in granting bail under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, based on the circumstances of the case.
The court established that the right to a timely trial is fundamental, and prolonged pre-trial detention without progress in the case can lead to the granting of bail, even in serious offenses under ....
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
