The Allahabad High Court in the case Umakant Yadav vs. State of U.P. observed and the bail has been denied to former MP Umakant Yadav in connection with a 2019 case wherein the case involved allegation of grabbing and damaging of the Gandhi Ashram in the Azamgarh district.
The bench comprising of Justice Dinesh Kumar Singh in the case observed and has noted that he being Bahubali, gangster and a dreaded criminal of Eastern Uttar Pradesh and is being known for having bahubali, mafia, and the gangster culture.
It has also been noted by the bench that he being a long, rich but inglorious criminal history of heinous offences to his name, which includes 15 murder cases and that he was being convicted very recently in two cases (under section 302 and section 420 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860).
The court stated that the it has allegedly been committed by the accused that the first offence of murder in the year 1974 and in 48 years of his long and heinous journey in the world of crime, thus, he could also be convicted only in two cases recently in the year 2022.
Further, it has been opined by the court that dreaded criminal should not be allowed to and is set to be free by enlarging him on bail and that such a person being constantly threaten to the civil society governed by the rule of law.
Facts of the Case:
The said case is being filed against Yadav pertains for breaking open the locks of Gandhi Ashram in Azamgarh and while stealing government property and documents and painting the Ashram premises with the pink color and the Ashram building got occupied by the accused applicant and his sons.
He was also being booked under Section 120-B, Section 454, Section 380, Section 447 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Section 3(2) (ka) of the Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, 1984.
The court in its order stated that Yadav had accumulated wealth and the properties of several hundred crores from the proceeds of crime, wherein using his political clout, muscle power, mafia, and don image.
It has also been stated by the court that he is being acquitted in several cases of heinous offences as he would win over the witnesses or make the witnesses tired or get them eliminated.
Accordingly, the said court denied him bail.
