Riyazuddin vs. State Of U.P.
Facts
This is a bail application filed by Riyazuddin, the applicant, who is accused in Case Crime No. 831 of 2006, under Section 2/3 Gangster Act, Police Station Kotwali Kalpi, District Jalaun. The applicant has been in jail since January 31, 2016. He was previously arrested in Case Crime No. 27 of 2016 under the Cow Slaughter Act and has been incarcerated since February 1, 2016. A non-bailable warrant was issued against him in the present case on April 18, 2016. The applicant's counsel argued that he has been falsely implicated due to ulterior motives and that his criminal history has been explained. The State, through the learned A.G.A., opposed the bail prayer.
Held
The Court granted bail to the applicant, Riyazuddin, in Case Crime No. 831 of 2006 under Section 2/3 Gangster Act. The Court considered the nature of the accusation, the severity of punishment in case of conviction, the nature of supporting evidence, the reasonable apprehension of tampering with witnesses, and a prima facie satisfaction of the Court in support of the charge, along with the reformative theory of punishment. The Court explicitly stated that it was not expressing any opinion on the merits of the case. The applicant was directed to furnish a personal bond with two sureties to the satisfaction of the court concerned, with conditions including cooperation in the trial, not tampering with witnesses, and not indulging in illegal activities during the bail period. The identity and residence proof of the sureties were to be verified. The trial court was given liberty to cancel the bail in case of breach of any conditions. The GST number mentioned (113/07) appears to be an identifier for the case and not a direct point of contention or decision in this bail application.
Key Issues
1. Whether the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in Case Crime No. 831 of 2006 under Section 2/3 Gangster Act, considering the nature of the accusation, severity of punishment, supporting evidence, apprehension of witness tampering, and the reformative theory of punishment? Petitioner's Arguments: - The applicant contends he has been falsely implicated due to ulterior motives. - He has been in jail since January 31, 2016, and previously since February 1, 2016, in another case. - His criminal history has been duly explained. - He assures cooperation with the legal process. Revenue/State's Arguments: - The learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail.
Sections Cited
Section 2, Section 3
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Court No. - 23 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 13495 of 2017 Applicant :- Riyazuddin Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- B.N.Singh,Mohammad Sadab Khan,Santosh Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Singh,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Vikas Rana, learned A.G.A. appearing for the State.
It has been contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. It is next contended that the earlier the applicant was arrested in Case Crime No.27 of 2016, under Sections 3/5/8 Cow Slaughter Act and is in jail since 1.2.2016 and in the meantime present case was also slapped on him in which N.B.W. was also issued against the applicant on 18.4.2016. the said facts has been mentioned in para 7 and 8 of the affidavit accompanying this bail application. Several other submissions in order to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against the applicant have also been placed forth before the Court. The circumstances which, according to the counsel, led to the false implication of the accused has also been touched upon at length
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.