Halkeraja @ Shishupal Singh vs. State Of U.P.
Held
The Court held that considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, and the decision of the Apex Court in Dataram Singh Vs. State of U.P. and another, the applicant is entitled to be released on bail. The court explicitly stated that it was not expressing any opinion on the merits of the case. The applicant was ordered to be released on bail upon furnishing a personal bond and two local sureties to the satisfaction of the court concerned. Specific conditions were imposed, including not indulging in criminal activity, not tampering with prosecution evidence, not pressuring prosecution witnesses, and regularly appearing on dates fixed by the trial court unless exempted. Default in any condition would allow the opposite parties to approach the court for cancellation of bail.
Facts
This is a bail application filed by Halkeraja @ Shishupal Singh. The applicant is involved in GST No. 197 of 2008, arising out of Case Crime No. 365 of 2008, under Section 2/3 of the U.P. Gangster Act, registered at Police Station Banpur, District Lalitpur. The applicant has been in jail since May 19, 2022. The applicant's counsel argued that the applicant has no previous criminal history, poses no flight risk, and will not tamper with witnesses. The learned Additional Government Advocate opposed the bail but could not dispute the facts presented by the applicant's counsel. The court considered the submissions and the decision of the Apex Court in Dataram Singh Vs. State of U.P. and another.
Key Issues
1. Whether the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in connection with GST No. 197 of 2008, arising out of Case Crime No. 365 of 2008 under Section 2/3 of the U.P. Gangster Act, considering his period of incarceration and lack of criminal history. Contentions: Petitioner (Applicant): The applicant argued that he has no prior criminal history, is not a flight risk, and will not tamper with witnesses. He has been in jail since May 19, 2022, and therefore, is entitled to bail. Revenue (State): The learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail but did not dispute the facts presented by the applicant's counsel.
Sections Cited
Section 2/3 of U.P. Gangster Act
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Court No. - 44 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 35565 of 2022 Applicant :- Halkeraja @ Shishupal Singh Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Ramesh Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Dr. Kaushal Jayendra Thaker,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record of the present bail application.
The present bail application has been filed by the applicant- Halkeraja @ Shishupal Singh with a prayer to enlarge him on bail in GST No.197 of 2008 arising out of Case Crime No.365 of 2008 under Section 2/3 of U.P. Gangster Act, Police Station Banpur, District Lalitpur.
Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that applicant has no previous criminal history and there is no possibility of fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the witnesses and in case, the applicant is enlarged on bail, the applicant shall not misuse the liberty of bail. The applicant has been in jail since 19.5.2022, hence, he is entitled to bail.
Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the applicant but could not dispute the aforesaid facts as argued by the learned counsel for t
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.