Created by Fuzzy Cloud | Our 2nd AI-Powered Solution
6 judgments · newest first · showing 1–6
The applicants filed a petition under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code seeking to quash the cognizance order dated 20‑11‑2019 issued by the Additional Session Judge, Special Judge (Gangster Act), Fatehpur, in a case arising under Sections 2 and 3 of the U.P. Gangster Act. The High Court …
Petitioner Ajay, who had been granted bail in six criminal cases, sought relief from the High Court to avoid furnishing separate sureties for each case, requesting that a single common surety be accepted. He relied on a Supreme Court judgment in Hani Nishad v. State of UP (SLA No. 8915 of 2018) …
The accused filed an anticipatory bail application under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code in a case registered under Sections 2 and 3 of the U.P. Gangster Act. During the hearing, the applicant sought to withdraw the anticipatory bail application and instead move a regular bail application …
The applicant, Jitendra @ Lukka @ Lukka Don, was incarcerated since 25‑12‑2024 on five separate criminal matters pending before the Bareilly courts. He sought bail under Section 528 of the B.N.S.S. but could not furnish the two sureties required in each case due to poverty. The applicant relied on a …
The applicant, Afsar (Puneet Kumar Singh), filed an anticipatory bail application under Sections 2 and 3 of the U.P. Gangster Act and the Anti‑Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, claiming he was falsely implicated. He highlighted that he was already on bail in three gang‑related cases and one …
The applicant, Karan Jaat, filed an application under Section 528 of the B.N.S.S. seeking bail in seven criminal cases pending before the Agra courts, arguing that he could not furnish separate sureties for each case due to poverty. He had been in custody since May 2023 and a prior bail order dated …
