Awadhesh @ Kalu vs. State Of U.P.
Held
The Court allowed the bail application. The Court considered the facts and circumstances of the case, the submissions made by both parties, and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, found that the applicant was entitled to bail. The applicant, Awadhesh @ Kalu, involved in Case Crime No. 836 of 2007, under Section 2/3 U.P. Gangster Act, Police Station Kotwali Nagar Etah, District Etah, arising out of GST No. 491 of 2008 (State Vs. Kashmir Sing and others), was directed to be released on bail upon furnishing a personal bond and two sureties. Specific conditions were imposed, including not tampering with evidence, not intimidating witnesses, appearing on fixed dates, not committing similar offences, and not inducing or threatening anyone to dissuade them from disclosing facts. The Court reserved the liberty to cancel the bail in case of breach of any condition.
Facts
This is a bail application filed by Awadhesh @ Kalu. The applicant was initially on bail, but a Non-Bailable Warrant (NBW) was issued in 2012. The applicant claims to have become aware of the NBW on November 15, 2017, and surrendered on November 30, 2017, remaining in jail for approximately nine months. The applicant's counsel explained five cases of criminal history. The applicant's counsel argued that the applicant's absence was due to file transfers, that he is a poor person, falsely implicated, and will cooperate in the trial if released. The State opposed the bail prayer.
Key Issues
1. Whether the applicant is entitled to be released on bail, considering his surrender after a significant delay following the issuance of a Non-Bailable Warrant, and the explanation provided for his absence. Petitioner's Arguments: - The applicant could not appear before the court due to the transfer of files. - The applicant is a poor person and has been falsely implicated. - The applicant will not misuse liberty and will cooperate in the trial. - The applicant has already spent approximately nine months in jail. - The applicant seeks one more opportunity. Revenue/State's Arguments: - The learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail.
Sections Cited
Section 2/3 U.P. Gangster Act
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Court No. - 41 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 26225 of 2018 Applicant :- Awadhesh @ Kalu Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Sanjay Kumar Dubey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Aniruddha Singh,J.
Supplementary affidavit filed by learned counsel for the applicant is taken on record.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A for the State and perused the record.
Initially the accused was on bail. N.B.W. was issued in the year 2012. It has come to the knowledge of the applicant on 15.11.2017 and he surrendered 30.11.2017 and till then he is languishing in jail (about nine months); five cases of criminal history have been explained.
Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that due to transfer of files from one place to another place, the applicant could not appear before the court below on the date fixed; he is a poor person; the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case; in case he is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in the trial. One more opportunity be granted to the applicant.
Learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail.
Having regard to the fact
The judgment continues below.
Read the full judgment
A free account opens 10 full GST judgments a month (one account works on both bharattax.net and this site). Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.
The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.
Reproduced from the public record of the Allahabad High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.