SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Online)(ALL) 698

HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD (LUCKNOW BENCH)
Hon'ble Manish Mathur,J.
Anshul Gautam – Appellant
Versus
The State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. – Respondent
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 2733 of 2025 at Lucknow



Advocates:
Petitioner: Sagar Singh and Shri Ram Maurya
Respondent: G.A.

Bail is the norm, and pre-trial detention is an exception; conditions for bail must ensure the accused's presence at trial.

Headnote:(A) U.P. Gangster and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 - Section 19(4) - Bail application - Applicant involved in multiple cases, previously granted bail - Court emphasizes that bail is the norm and pre-trial detention is an exception - Conditions for bail outlined to ensure presence at trial. (Paras 6, 7, 9)

(B) Principle of Bail - The object of bail is to secure appearance at trial, not punitive - Deprivation of liberty is a punishment unless necessary to ensure trial attendance. (Paras 6, 7)

Facts of the case:
The applicant is involved in several cases under various sections, previously granted bail in all cases.

Findings of Court:
The applicant is entitled to bail as conditions of the U.P. Act are satisfied.

Issues: Whether the applicant meets the conditions for bail under the U.P. Act.

Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that bail should be granted as the applicant has complied with the statutory conditions and emphasized the principle that bail is the rule.

Result: Bail application allowed.

Hon'ble Manish Mathur,J.

1. Heard learned counsel for applicant, learned Additional Government Advocate appearing on behalf of opposite party no.1-State and perused the record.

2. This first bail application has been filed with regard to Case Crime No.776 of 2024, under Section 2/3(1) U. P. Gangster and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, P.S.- Kotwali, District Unnao.

3. It is submitted that as per gang chart, applicant is shown involved in two cases bearing Case Crime No.486 of 2024, under Sections 310(2), 311/317(3) BNS and Case Crime No.209 of 2024, under Sections 309(4)/317(2) BNS in which she has already been enlarged on bail in Bail Application No.2121 of 2024 and 2321 of 2024 by the Trial Court.

4. It is submitted that apart from the aforesaid cases, applicant is also shown involved in Case Crime No.46 of 2023, under Sections 308, 323, 354B IPC and Section 7/8 Protection of Children From Sexual Offences Act in which also he has been enlarged on bail by trial court in Bail application No.1195 of 2024.

5. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail but does not dispute the aforesaid facts.

6. Hon'ble the Supreme Court in Sanjay Chandra v. Central Bureau of Investigation , reported in (2012) 1 SCC 40 has specifically held that bail is to be a norm and an under-trial is not required to be in jail for ever pending trial. Relevant paragraphs of the judgment are as under :-

"21. In bail applications, generally, it has been laid down from the earliest times that the object of bail is to secure the appearance of the accused person at his trial by reasonable amount of bail. The object of bail is neither punitive nor preventative. Deprivation of liberty must be considered a punishment, unless it is required to ensure that an accused person will stand his trial when called upon. The courts owe more than verbal respect to the principle that punishment begins after conviction, and that every man is deemed to be innocent until duly tried and duly found guilty."

"27. This Court, time and again, has stated that bail is the rule and committal to jail an exception. It has also observed that refusal of bail is a restriction on the personal liberty of the individual guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution."

7. Considering submissions advanced by learned counsel for parties and upon perusal of material available on record, prima facie, and subject to further evidence being led in trial, it appears that applicant has already been enlarged on bail in all the cases filed against him as averred in the affidavit filed in support of the application and therefore conditions indicated in Section 19(4) U.P. Gangsters and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 stand complied with at this stage, therefore the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case.

8. Accordingly bail application is allowed

9. Let applicant Anshul Gautam involved in the aforesaid case crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-

(i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law.

(ii) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 269 of Bharatiya Nayay Sanhita , 2023 (BNS).

(iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 84 of Bharatiya Nayay Sanhita , 2023 (BNS) is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such pr

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top