Shailendra Yadav vs. State Of U.P.

Held

The Court decided to grant bail to the applicant, Shailendra Yadav. The reasoning was based on the submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the applicant, particularly the fact that only one case was shown against the applicant in the Gang Chart and that bail had already been granted in that case. The Court also considered the applicant's period of detention since September 13, 2019. The ratio decidendi is that if the sole predicate offense for invoking the Gangsters Act has already resulted in bail, and the applicant has undergone a significant period of incarceration, bail may be considered. The operative direction is that the applicant be enlarged on bail on his executing a personal bond and furnishing two sureties to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to several conditions aimed at ensuring his presence during trial and preventing misuse of liberty.

Facts

This is a bail application filed by Shailendra Yadav, the applicant, who is involved in GST No. 39 of 2020 in Case Crime No. 382 of 2019, under Section 2/3 of the U.P. Gangsters and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, Police Station Kurawali, District Mainpuri. The applicant has been in jail since September 13, 2019. The applicant's counsel contended that only one case is shown against the applicant in the Gang Chart, and bail has already been granted in that case. The learned Additional Government Advocate opposed the prayer for bail.

Key Issues

1. Whether the applicant, Shailendra Yadav, is entitled to be enlarged on bail under Section 19 of the U.P. Gangsters and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, considering his detention period and the fact that bail has been granted in the sole case listed against him in the Gang Chart. Contentions: Petitioner/Applicant: The applicant argued that his continued detention is unjustified as he has been in jail since September 13, 2019, and the only case listed against him in the Gang Chart has already resulted in him being granted bail by the competent court. This implies that the basis for invoking the Gangsters Act is weakened. Revenue/State: The learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail, without further elaboration on specific legal grounds or precedents.