High CourtsSingle Bench

Gurdeep Singh Alias Dippa vs State Of Uttarakhand

Uttarakhand High Court · Decided on 27 February 2023 · Citation: (2023) 02 UK CK 0102

HON’BLE JUDGES
Alok Kumar Verma, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Code Of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — Section 439 · Uttar Pradesh Gangsters And Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 — Section 2, 3 · Constitution Of India, 1950 — Article 21
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
First Bail Application No. 2190 Of 2022
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

14 paragraphs · 453 words

Alok Kumar Verma, J

1.

The present Bail Application has been filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for grant of regular bail in connection with the First Information Report No.28 of 2020, registered at Police Station Nanakmatta, District Udham Singh Nagar under Section 2/3 of the Uttar Pradesh Gangsters and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 (as applicable in the State of Uttarakhand).

2.

An FIR was lodged on 14.02.2020 against the applicant and three co-accused persons by Kamlesh Bhatt, Station House Officer, Police Station Nanakmatta, District Udham Singh Nagar. Charge-sheet has been filed. Five criminal cases have been shown in the Gang Chart.

3.

Heard Mr. D.N. Sharma, learned counsel with Ms. Manju Bahuguna, learned counsel for the applicant and Mrs. Shivangi Gangwar, learned Brief Holder for the State.

4.

Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that two co-accused persons have been granted bail by this Court. Applicant is in custody since 13.03.2021. He is a permanent resident of District Udham Singh Nagar. Therefore, there is no likelihood of applicant absconding as well

5.

Learned counsel for the State opposed the bail application.

6.

Bail is the rule and committal to jail is an exception. Refusal of bail is a restriction on the personal liberty of the individual, guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. The object of keeping the accused person in detention during the trial is not punishment. The main purpose is manifestly to secure the attendance of the accused.

7.

Having considered the submissions of learned counsel for both the parties and in the facts and circumstances of the case, there is no reason to keep the applicant behind the bars for an indefinite period, therefore, without expressing any opinion as to the merit of the case, this Court is of the view that the applicant deserves bail at this stage.

8.

The bail application is allowed.

9.

Let the applicant – Gurdeep Singh Alias Dippa be released on bail on his executing a personal bond and furnishing two reliable sureties, each in the like amount, to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions :-

i) Applicant shall attend the Trial Court regularly and he will not seek any unnecessary adjournment;

ii) Applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of this case.

10.

It is clarified that if the applicant misuses or violates any of the conditions, imposed upon him, Prosecution will be free to move the court for cancellation of bail.

11.

Registry is directed to send a soft-copy of this bail order immediately by e-mail to the applicant-prisoner through the concerned Jail Superintendant for necessary action.