Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:16350 Court No. - 13 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 2346 of 2025 Applicant :- Pradeep Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Narendra Pratap Mishra,Toshendra Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Manish Mathur,J. 1. Supplementary affidavit filed today is taken on record. 2. Heard learned counsel for applicant, learned Additional Government Advocate appearing on behalf of State and perused the record. 3. This first bail application has been filed with regard to Case Crime No.0051/2025, under Section 2/3(1) U.P.Gangsters and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, P.S. Kotwali Nagar, District Raebareli. 4. Submission of learned counsel for applicant is that as per the gang chart, there are two cases indicated against applicant being Crime No.127 of 2023 under Section 420, 467, 468, 471 I.P.C. and Case Crime No.200 of 2023 under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 I.P.C. in which applicant has already been enlarged on bail. It is submitted that apart from aforesaid two cases, the applicant has been shown as involved in three other cases in Case Crime No.190/2023, 212/2024 and 51/2025. It is submitted that in Crime No.190 of 2023, a final report has already been submitted while in Crime No.212 of 2024, the applicant has been enlarged on bail by this Court in Crl. Misc. Bail Application No.7687 of 2024 brought on record by means of supplementary affidavit. In Crime No.51 of 2025, applicant has been enlarged on bail by this Court in Crl. Misc. Bail Application No.2115 of 2025 [Annexure-3]. 5. Learned Additional Government Advocate, on the basis of instructions, has opposed the bail application but does not dispute the fact that applicant has been enlarged on bail in all the cases in which he is shown to be involved with final report being submitted as indicated in Bail Order pertaining to Crl. Misc. Bail Application No.13580 of 2023. 6. Hon'ble the Supreme Court in Sanjay Chandra v. Central Bureau of Investigation, reported in (2012) 1 SCC 40 has specifically held that bail is to be a norm and an under-trial is not required to be in jail for ever pending trial. Relevant paragraphs of the judgment are as under :- "21. In bail applications, generally, it has been laid down from the earliest times that the object of bail is to secure the appearance of the accused person at his trial by reasonable amount of bail. The object of bail is neither punitive nor preventative. Deprivation of liberty must be considered a punishment, unless it is required to ensure that an accused person will stand his trial when called upon. The courts owe more than verbal respect to the principle that punishment begins after conviction, and that every man is deemed to be innocent until duly tried and duly found guilty." "27. This Court, time and again, has stated that bail is the rule and committal to jail an exception. It has also observed that refusal of bail is a restriction on the personal liberty of the individual guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution." 7. In view of aforesaid submission and fact that applicant has already been enlarged on bail in all the case shown against him in the gang chart and also in other cases shown subsequent thereto except in Case Crime No. 190 of 2023 wherein a final report has been submitted, therefore conditions indicated in Section 19(4) U.P.Gangsters and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 stands complied with at this stage, as such, the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case. It is submitted that in Crime No.190 of 2023, a final report has already been submitted . 8. Accordingly bail application is allowed. 9. Let applicant Pradeep involved in the aforesaid case crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions which are being imposed in the interest of justice:- (i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law. (ii) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code. (iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code. (iv) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. If in the opinion of the trial court, absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law. Order Date :- 21.3.2025 kvg/- Digitally signed by :- GIREESAN KV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench