HARIPAL Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD learned counsel for the applicant and learned Additional Government Advocate. I have gone through the contents of the First Information Report, the bail rejection order and the gang chart. I have also gone through the counter and rejoinder affidavits exchanged between the parties. Submission of learned counsel for the applicant is that three cases have been shown against the applicant in the gang chart one relating to case under section 60 of the Excise Act and the other relating to Section 21/22 of the N.D.P.S. Act. It has been argued that two cases relating to case crime No. 2239 of 2008 under Section 60/63 Excise Act and Section 272 IPC and case crime no. 2240 under section 21/22 of the N.D.P.S Act have been imposed upon the applicant on one and the same day. It is further stated that in all the cases the applicant has been released on bail. It is further argued that just to see that the applicant remains behind the bar, the provisions of the U.P. Gangsters and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act have been slapped on him. Without expressing on the merits of the case and considering the severity of the punishment, I am of the view that the applicant may be enlarged on bail. Let applicant Haripal involved in case crime no. 10 of 2009 under section 2/3 of the U.P. Gangsters and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act of P.S. Bangarmau, district Unnao be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of learned Special Judge concerned.