J.J. Munir - (1.) This is an application for bail on behalf of the applicant, Amitabh @ Irshad in connection with Case Crime No. 289 of 2007, under Section 2/3 of the UP Gangsters and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 P.S. Jewar District Gautam Budh Nagar.
(2.) It is made out in the affidavit filed in support of the bail application that the applicant was on bail in the present crime pending trial. 26.03.2010 was the date fixed before the Trial Court and on that date, the applicant made an application seeking exemption of his personal presence. The next date fixed was 07.05.2010 and he could not appear. It is further stated in the affidavit that the trial has been transferred from one Court to another at Ghaziabad Judgeship, of which the applicant could not keep track. Lateron, the case was transferred from Ghaziabad Judgeship to the Judgeship of Gautam Budh Nagar on 21.12.2012. The applicant could not know the whereabouts of the Trial and in consequence he did not appear. He appeared before the Court on 05.12.2014 in response to a non bailable warrant and applied for recall. It appears that the recall application was rejected. Lateron, an application for bail was made, which, too, has come to be rejected vide order dated 28.01.2020. It is also made out in the application that the applicant is in jail since 05.12.2019. Notice of this Application was served upon the learned Government Advocate on 25.02.2020 but no objection on behalf of the State or a counter affidavit to this application has been filed. Considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case, the nature of allegations, the gravity of the offence, the severity of punishment, the evidence appearing in the case, in particular, the fact that the applicant was admitted to bail, the fact that the case was transferred from Ghaziabad Judgeship to the Judgeship of Gautam Budh Nagar, but without expressing any opinion on merits, this Court, finds it to be a fit case for bail.
(3.) The Division Bench of this Court in Public Interest Litigation (PIL) No. 564 of 2020 has taken note of unprecedented threat caused by Novel Corona Virus (Covid-19) on the one hand and the other, the difficulties that arise out of verification of sureties given the conditions of lockdown leading to obstruction in the execution of bail orders. In this regard, the Division Bench passed the following orders: '(ii) It is brought to our notice that before enforcement of the lockdown different courts in the State of Uttar Pradesh including the High Court have granted orders to release the accused-applicants on bail but they have not been released so far due to non-availability of sureties. Looking to impediments in arranging sureties because of lockdown, while invoking powers under Article 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, we deem it appropriate to order that all the accused-applicants whose bail applications came to be allowed on or after 15th March, 2020 but have not been released due to non-availability of sureties as a consequence to lockdown may be released on executing personal bond as ordered by the Court or to the satisfaction of the jail authorities where such accused is imprisoned, provided the accused-applicants undertakes to furnish required sureties within a period of one month from the date of his/her actual release.' In view of what has been said above, this Bail Application stands allowed. Let the applicant Amitabh @ Irshad involved in Case Crime No. 289 of 2007, under Section 2/3 of the UP Gangsters and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 P.S. Jewar District Gautam Budh Nagar be released on bail on executing a personal bond before the Court concerned provided the applicant undertakes to furnish two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned within one month of the date of his release from jail subject to the following conditions: i) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence. ii) The applicant shall not threaten or harass the prosecution witnesses. iii) The applicant shall appear on the date fixed by the Trial Court. iv) The applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which the applicant is accused, or suspected of the commission. v) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade such person from disclosing facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence. vi) The applicant shall cause to be filed before the Court empowered to release the applicant in compliance with this order a computer generated copy of this order downloaded from the official website of the Allahabad High Court. vii) The computer generated copy of this order shall be attested by the learned Counsel for the applicant, who files that copy before the Court empowered to release. viii) The Court concerned shall verify the authenticity of the said computer generated and attested copy of the order from the official website of the Allahabad High Court, and shall endorse in his hand a certification to the effect that he has undertaken a verification of the copy of this order as aforesaid in the manner above directed. ;