Facts of the Case

The applicant, Wasif, filed his second bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. seeking release on bail in connection with Case Crime No. 999 of 2020 registered under Sections 2/3 of the U.P. Gangsters and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986. His first bail application had already been rejected on merits by the Allahabad High Court on 16.11.2021.

The applicant contended that two co-accused had subsequently been granted bail and that the trial had not yet commenced despite submission of the charge-sheet. He further asserted that he was a businessman engaged in transport, logistics, and construction, possessed GST and TIN registrations, was an income tax assessee, and had remained in judicial custody for more than one year without framing of charges.

 

Issues Involved

  1. Whether the applicant was entitled to bail in a second bail application after rejection of the first bail application on merits.
  2. Whether grant of bail to co-accused constituted a fresh ground for granting bail.
  3. Whether prolonged custody and delay in commencement of trial justified release on bail.
  4. Whether the applicant's extensive criminal antecedents disentitled him from obtaining bail.

 

Petitioner's Arguments

The applicant submitted that:

  • Two co-accused had already been granted bail by the High Court.
  • The trial had not commenced and charges had not yet been framed despite filing of the charge-sheet.
  • He was engaged in legitimate business activities relating to transport, logistics, and construction.
  • His business was duly registered with GST and TIN authorities, and he was an income tax assessee.
  • He had remained in custody for more than one year.
  • Considering these circumstances, he deserved to be enlarged on bail during trial.

 

Respondent's Arguments

The State and the first informant opposed the bail application and argued that:

  • The applicant's first bail application had already been rejected by a detailed order on merits.
  • The fact that co-accused had obtained bail had already been considered while rejecting the earlier bail application.
  • The applicant possessed an extensive criminal history involving nearly twenty criminal cases.
  • No fresh or substantial circumstance had arisen after rejection of the first bail application.
  • Therefore, no ground existed for reconsideration of bail.

 

Court Order / Findings

The Allahabad High Court observed that the first bail application had been rejected on merits after considering the applicant's criminal antecedents. The Court noted that the applicant was involved not only in the cases forming part of the gang chart but also in several other criminal cases.

The Court held that the applicant failed to demonstrate any fresh or significant change in circumstances warranting reconsideration of the earlier order rejecting bail. The criminal history and its explanation had already been examined while deciding the first bail application.

Accordingly, the Court found no justification to grant bail and rejected the second bail application.

However, since the charge-sheet had already been filed, the Court directed the trial court to conclude the trial expeditiously in accordance with Section 309 Cr.P.C., keeping in view the principles laid down by the Supreme Court regarding speedy trial.

 

Important Clarification

  • A second bail application cannot ordinarily succeed merely because some co-accused have subsequently been granted bail when such circumstances were already considered in the earlier rejection order.
  • Long incarceration alone does not automatically entitle an accused to bail where no fresh grounds are established and the accused has an extensive criminal history.
  • Courts may simultaneously refuse bail while directing the trial court to ensure expeditious completion of the trial under Section 309 Cr.P.C.
  • Successive bail applications require substantial change in circumstances after rejection of the earlier application on merits.

Sections Involved

  • Section 2/3 of the U.P. Gangsters and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986
  • Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973
  • Section 309 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973


Link to download the order -

https://www.mytaxexpert.co.in/uploads/1784616441_1614compressed.pdf

Disclaimer

This content is shared strictly for general information and knowledge purposes only. Readers should independently verify the information from reliable sources. It is not intended to provide legal, professional, or advisory guidance. The author and the organisation disclaim all liability arising from the use of this content. The material has been prepared with the assistance of AI tools.