ANNU Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Supplementary affidavit filed on behalf of the applicant is taken on record.

(2.) Heard Mr. Manish Kumar Tiwari, learned counsel for the applicant, Mr. Ram Awadh Maurya, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State and perused the material placed on record.

(3.) It is submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case with some ulterior motive. It is further contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that according to gang chart, two cases have been registered against the applicant, in which the applicant has been enlarged on bail. Learned counsel for the applicant contended that there is a criminal history of two cases against the applicant, which have not been shown in the gang chart, out of which in Case Crime No. 66 of 2013, under section 60 of Excise Act, on the basis of his confession, the applicant has been convicted and sentenced to a fine of Rs. 1200/- and in Case Crime No. 87 of 2013, the applicant is on bail. It has also been submitted that there is nothing on record to show that applicant has gained any undue temporal pecuniary material or any other advantage for himself or any other person by gangster and anti social activities acts. It is next submitted that there is no report of District Magistrate/Special Court on record regarding acquisition of any movable or immovable property by the applicant. Learned counsel for the applicant argued that the provisions of the Act has been used against the applicant like a weapon to harass and intimidate the innocent applicant. It is next contended that there are no chances of the applicant of fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the prosecution evidence. It is lastly contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is in jail since 31.01.2018. In case, he is enlarged on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.