The Allahabad High Court has rejected the bail of the former UP MLA Mukhtar Ansari in connection with a case under UP Gangster Act, saying that the rich criminal horoscope of the accused made him to be a popular public figure. It is the most unfortunate and ugly face of our democracy where a person on one hand is facing almost two dozen sessions of trials, but he gets elected by the public as their representative for six consecutive times.
A Single Bench of Justice Dinesh Kumar Singh passed this order while hearing a Criminal Misc Bail Application filed by Mokhtar Ansari.
The application under Section 439 CrPC was filed on 4.10.2021 seeking bail in FIR/Case under Section 3(1) of the U.P Gangster and Anti-social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, Police Station Tarwan, District Azamgarh.
Counsel for the accused-applicant submitted that he has received instructions to withdraw the bail application without undertaking that he would not file a fresh application seeking bail in the aforesaid case crime number.
The Court is of the view that the accused-applicant wants to avoid this Bench and, therefore, it has been prayed on behalf of the accused applicant to reject this bail application as withdrawn simpliciter as there is no bar for filing subsequent bail application. Therefore, the Court would like to proceed to decide the case on merit instead of rejecting the bail application as withdrawn simpliciter.
The Court noted that,
The Supreme Court in the case of Fatehchand Himmatlal and others vs State of Maharashtra and others, (1977) 2 SCC 670 has held that it is important, by comity of the Bench and the Bar, to conserve judicial time in the name of public justice.
The Supreme Court has time and again deprecated the practice of bench-hunting, bench-hopping and bench-avoiding.
In the case of Subrata Roy Sahara Vs Union of India and others, (2014) 8 SCC 470 has held that any act of bench-hunting, bench-hopping and bench-avoiding cannot be allowed. The benchmark, that justice must not only be done but should also appear to be done, has to be preserved at all costs. Any attempt for bench-hunting, bench-hopping and bench avoiding needs to be strongly repulsed.
Allegation against the accused-applicant is that on 6.10.2020, the Incharge Inspector, Swatantra Kumar Singh along with police team was on patrol duty and was to look out for the wanted criminals and, therefore, the vehicles etc were being checked.
During the patrol of the police team, it was noticed an organised gang containing Rajendra Pasi alias Bhusi Pasi S/o Rambadan Pasi, Rajan Pasi S/o Dehuni, Harikesh Yadav S/o Phoolchand, Rajesh Singh alias Rajan Singh S/o Late Ramvriksh Singh, Sahan Pasi S/o Prasidh Pasi, Chota Pankaj Yadav S/o Ramkaran Yadav, Shyam Babu S/o Pasidh Pasi and Abhishek Mishra alias Deepu Mishra S/o Lalji Mishra and other accused. The leader of the gang is the accused-applicant.
The leader and members of the gang committed heinous offences such as murder, abduction, extortion, loot ransom etc for their financial, economic and material benefits. Because of the criminal activities such as murder etc there remains a problem of law and order.
Because of the fear and terror of this gang, no one comes forward to lodge a report at the police station and no one dares to give evidence against any member of the gang. As this gang and leader is involved in heinous cases such as murder etc, their freedom would not be in the interest of the public in general. The gang and its leader have been committing the offences under Chapter 16, 17 and 22 of IPC and they are habitual criminals.
On 6.2.2014 at around 19:20 hours in Village Esa Kalapokhri where work was being conducted by a contractor through the workers, the gang members came there and fired from the automatic weapons on the workers, as a result thereof one worker, Ram Iqbal S/o Mohan died on the spot. Pachu S/o Ramjatan got seriously injured and received several fire arm injuries. This incident created an atmosphere of helter skelter. People got scared and terrified.
In respect of the said offence, Case under Sections 147, 148, 149, 302, 307, 506 and120-B IPC and Section 7 Criminal Law Amendment Act was lodged and after completion of the investigation, charge sheet dated 14.5.2014 and other charge sheets were filed. Gang chart was approved by the District Magistrate.
AGA has submitted that the accused-applicant is the most dreaded criminal, gangster and one of the biggest bahubali of India.
“The Court while rejecting the bail application of the accused applicant in Criminal Misc Bail Application no 46494 of 2021 in Case Crime no185 of 2021, under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 and 120- B IPC, Police Station Sarai Lakhansi, District Mau has said that the accused-applicant is a notorious criminal, who is an image of ‘Robin Hood’ in Northern India. He is a hardened and habitual offender, who has been in the sphere of crime since 1986, but he has not managed a single conviction against him. He has more than 56 cases to his credit of heinous nature and he could manage his affairs in such a way that he did not receive a single conviction barring two which have been rendered recently. This Court said that it is slur and challenge to the judicial system that such an dreaded and white colored criminal in the field of crime is undefeated and unabated”, the Court further noted.
The Court has taken note of the criminal cases registered against the accused-applicant and said that the rich criminal horoscope of the accused-applicant made him to be popular public figure and he got elected to the Legislative Assembly for six consecutive times. It is the most unfortunate and ugly face of our democracy where a person on one hand is facing almost two dozen sessions of trials, but he gets elected by the public as their representative for six consecutive times.
The Court said that,
If the accused-applicant is not a gangster, then in this country no one can be said to be a gangster. He and his gang members accumulated enormous wealth by striking fear and terror in the minds and hearts of the people and his freedom would be perilous to the law abiding citizens of this Court.
The present offence was committed only with object to strike fear that no one should dare to take contract except for the accused-applicant or his gang members and, therefore, the members of the gang opened indiscriminate fire from illegal automatic weapons on innocent workers, which resulted into death of one person and injury to others in order to strike fear and terror and give a message that one should not dare to take contract work of the Government in his area.
“Considering the allegations and the rich criminal horoscope of the accused-applicant and also taking into consideration of the fact that in most of the cases the accused-applicant could secure acquittal as the witnesses turned hostile because of fear and terror or the witnesses got eliminated and a criminal, gangster and bahubali, the accused-applicant is not entitled to be enlarged on bail”, the Court observed while rejecting the bail application.