# Abhijeet Yadav v. State of U.P. Opp. Party - **Citation:** (2021) 1 ILRA 942 - **Court:** High Court of Judicature at Allahabad - **Decided:** 2020-12-18 - **Case number:** Crl. Misc. Bail Appl. No. 48461 of 2020 - **Bench:** Shamim Ahmed - **Source:** https://unisonlegal.in/judgment/allahabad-high-court/abhijeet-yadav-v-state-of-u-p-opp-party-46141 - **Pages:** 3 ## Headnote A. Criminal Law - U.P. Gangster and AntiSocial(Prevention) Activities,Act,1986Section 3(1)-application-grant of bailapplicant having been released on bail in all criminal cases which have been shown to be the basis of imposing provision of the Act-provision of the Act have been illused by the police in ordr to perpetuate the detention of the applicant in jail anyhow-Hence, the prayer for bail granted. (Para 2 to 6) The bail application is allowed. (E-5) List of Cases cited: Dataram Singh Vs St. of U.P. & anr.(2018) 3 SCC 22 ## Text 942 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES (1) The applicant will not make any attempt to tamper with the prosecution evidence in any manner whatsoever. (2) The applicant will personally appear on each and every date fixed in the court below and his personal presence shall not be exempted unless the court itself deems it fit to do so in the interest of justice. (3) The applicant shall cooperate in the trial sincerely without seeking any adjournment. (4) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail. (5)The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad or certified copy issued from the Registry of the High Court, Allahabad. (6) The concerned Court /Authority /Official shall verify the authenticity of such computerized copy of the order from the official website of High Court Allahabad and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing. 9. It may be observed that in the event of any breach of the aforesaid conditions, the court below shall be at liberty to proceed for the cancellation of applicant's bail. 10. It is clarified that the observations, if any, made in this order are strictly confined to the disposal of the bail application and must not be construed to have any reflection on the ultimate merits of the case. ---------- (2021)01ILR A942 APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL SIDE DATED: ALLAHABAD 18.12.2020 BEFORE THE HON'BLE SHAMIM AHMED, J. Crl. Misc. Bail Appl. No. 48461 of 2020 Abhijeet Yadav ...Applicant Versus State of U.P. ...Opp. Party Counsel for the Applicant: Sri Vivek Singh Shrinet Counsel for the Opp. Party: A.G.A. A. Criminal Law - U.P. Gangster and AntiSocial(Prevention) Activities,Act,1986Section 3(1)-application-grant of bailapplicant having been released on bail in all criminal cases which have been shown to be the basis of imposing provision of the Act-provision of the Act have been illused by the police in ordr to perpetuate the detention of the applicant in jail anyhow-Hence, the prayer for bail granted. (Para 2 to 6) The bail application is allowed. (E-5) List of Cases cited: Dataram Singh Vs St. of U.P. & anr.(2018) 3 SCC 22 (Delivered by Hon'ble Shamim Ahmed, J.) 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned A.G.A. appearing for the State and perused the record. 2. This application has been filed seeking the release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 609 of 2020, under Section 3(1) of the U.P. Gangster and Anti Social (Prevention) Activities Act, 1986, Police Station Jhangaha District Gorakhpur. 3. The chief plank of the submissions made on behalf of accused is that in all cases which have been made the basis to 1 All. Abhijeet Yadav Vs. State of U.P. 943 impose the provisions of Gangster Act against the accused, he has already been granted bail by the Court. Contention is that the provisions of the Act have been illused by the Police in order to perpetuate the detention of the applicant in jail anyhow even though the offence under the aforesaid Act is not made out. Submission is that the applicant is not a gangster and has never acted or conducted himself as such. Counsel for the applicant has also tried to demonstrate that the alleged previous offences which are said to have been committed by the applicant can at the most be said to be stray incident of breach of law having no nexus with the definition of a gangster as has been provided in the Act. 4. Further submission is that as the applicant has already been released on bail in all the cases on the basis of which the provisions of the Act were imposed, it shall not be much justified to continue the incarceration of the applicant. Submission is also that the applicant is not guilty of having committed any offence under the Gangster Act. It has also been pointed out that the accused is in jail since 31.5.2020 and that in the wake of heavy pendency of cases in the Court, there is no likelihood of any early conclusion of trial. 5. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the fact of applicant having been released on bail in all the criminal cases which have been shown to be the basis of imposing the provisions of the Act. 6. After perusing the record in the light of the submissions made at the bar and after taking an overall view of all the facts and circumstances of this case, the nature of evidence, the period of detention already undergone, the unlikelihood of early conclusion of trial and also the absence of any convincing material to indicate the possibility of tampering with the evidence and larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India and the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh vs. State of UP and another, (2018) 3 SCC 22, this Court is of the view that the applicant may be enlarged on bail. 7. Let the applicant- Abhijeet Yadav, involved in Case Crime No. 609 of 2020, under Section 3(1) of the U.P. Gangster and Anti Social (Prevention) Activities Act, 1986, Police Station Jhangaha District Gorakhpur, be released on bail on his executing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned on the following conditions :- (1) The applicant will not make any attempt to tamper with the prosecution evidence in any manner whatsoever. (2) The applicant will personally appear on each and every date fixed in the court below and his personal presence shall not be exempted unless the court itself deems it fit to do so in the interest of justice. (3) The applicant shall cooperate in the trial sincerely without seeking any adjournment. (4) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail. (5)The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad or certified copy issued from the Registry of the High Court, Allahabad. (6) The concerned Court/Authority/Official shall verify the 944 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES authenticity of such computerized copy of the order from the official website of High Court Allahabad and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing 8. It may be observed that in the event of any breach of the aforesaid conditions, the court below shall be at liberty to proceed for the cancellation of applicant's bail. 9. It is clarified that the observations, if any, made in this order are strictly confined to the disposal of the bail application and must not be construed to have any reflection on the ultimate merits of the case. ---------- (2021)01ILR A944 ORIGINAL JURISDICTION CIVIL SIDE DATED: ALLAHABAD 08.12.2020 BEFORE THE HON'BLE J.J. MUNIR, J. Writ-A No. 45161 of 2017 Akhilesh Kumar Upadhyay ...Petitioner Versus State of U.P. & Ors. ...Respondents Counsel for the Petitioner: Sri Prabhakar Awasthi, Sri Dharmendra Kumar Dwivedi Counsel for the Respondents: C.S.C., Sri Mrigraj Singh Civil Law-Petitioner-appointment on compassionate ground-terminated on account of respondents confounding his father's name with that of another teacher - who was his father's namesake-The disassociation of Petitioner from 1992 until 2010 to be treated as effaced-therefore entitled for benefit of G.O. dated 01.02.2000 reckoning his appointment as an untrained teacher-Petitioner entitled to pay scale of trained teacher counting 5 years servive from joining duty. W.P. allowed with cost. (E-7) (Delivered by Hon'ble J.J. Munir, J.) 1. This writ petition is directed against an order dated 05.07.2017 passed by the Basic Shiksha Adhikari, Jaunpur, by which the Basic Shiksha Adhikari has refused to extend benefit of the Government Order dated 01.02.2000 to the petitioner, entitling him to salary of a trained teacher, upon completion of five years service. 2. Parties have exchanged affidavits. 3. Admit. 4. Heard forthwith. 5. Heard Mr. Dharmendra Kumar Dwivedi, learned Counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Mrigraj Singh, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of respondent nos.3 and 4 and Mr. Sriprakash Singh, learned Standing Counsel, appearing for respondent nos.1 and 2. 6. The petitioner's father was a Headmaster, posted at Prathmik Vidyalaya, Bhikharipur, Block Sujanganj, District Jaunpur. He died in harness on 05.09.1974. The petitioner applied for compassionate appointment, under the Dying-in-Harness Rules applicable. It is common ground between parties that the petitioner was appointed as Assistant Teacher (Primary), under the Dying-in-Harness Rules vide order dated 29.10.1991. He was posted to Prathmik Vidyalaya, Kailwal, Block Maharajganj, District Jaunpur. The petitioner joined on 01.11.1991.