RAMAN SAHANI Vs. STATE OF U.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri Sushil Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri I.B. Singh, Senior Advocate assisted by Sri Avinash Singh Vishen, Advocate; Sri V.K. Singh, G.A. assisted by Sri Shivendra Shivam Singh Rathore, Sri Aniruddh Kumar Singh, AGA-I assisted by Sri Vaibhav Srivastava, Sri Nirmal Pandey, learned A.G.A. for the State; Sri Gaurav Mehrotra, Advocate, Amicus Curie, assisted by Sri Utsav Misra, Akber Ahmed, Madhur Jhavar, Maria Fatima, Alina, Chinmay Misra, Ravi Singh, Harsh Vardhan Mehrotra, Ramendra Yadav, Shhriya Agarwal, Ahad, Ankit Tripathi (Advocates) and Sri Sriniwas Bajpai, learned counsel for the complainant.

(2.) The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant with the prayer to grant him anticipatory bail in Case Crime No. 124 of 2021, under Sec. - 2 and 3 of U.P. Gangster Act P.S.- Kotwali District ­ Sitapur.

(3.) At the very outset, the objection regarding the maintainability of the instant application are raised in two folds. One that the applicant has moved this application directly to this Court, which is not maintainable as per the law laid down in case of Ankit Bharti Vs. State of U.P. anothers 2020 SCC OnLine All 1949 and secondly, in light of the provision of sub-sec. 6(a)(b) of Sec. 438 of Cr.P.C. as amended by U.P. State legislature namely, U.P. State Amendment 2019, (Uttar Pradesh Amendment) Act 2018 (U.P. Act No. 4 of 2019) (hereinafter referred to as 'Act 2018, U.P. Act No. 4 of 2019') the benefit of provision of anticipatory bail is available in the matter pertaining to Gangster Act.