Allowed

Pancham Yadav v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC19 Jul 2018BAIL/25627/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single judge granted bail to Pancham Yadav in a case under Section 3(2)(5) of SC/ST Act, relying on his prior bail in substantive rape charges and lack of criminal history, without expressing an opinion on merits.

What did the court decide?

Release on bail with a personal bond and two sureties subject to conditions not to tamper with evidence, pressure witnesses, or fail to appear in court.

Pancham Yadav Vs State of U.P. — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Allahabad HC (2018)

¶1

Court No. - 52

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 25627 of 2018 Applicant :- Pancham Yadav Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Priya Ranjan Rai Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶3

Hon'ble Rajul Bhargava,J.

¶4

Heard Sri Priya Ranjan Rai, learned counsel for the applicant and the learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶5

The present bail application has been filed by the applicant-Pancham Yadav in Case Crime No.263 of 2017, under Section 3(2)5 of SC/ST Act, Police Station Jahanaganj, District-Azamgarh with the prayer to enlarge him on bail.

¶6

The submission of the learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant was granted bail by coordinate Bench of this Court in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.17807 of 2018 on 14.5.2018 under Sections 363, 366, 376 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 of POCSO Act and Section 3(2)(V ka) of SC/ST Act. It is stated that earlier bail application was not rejected by the court below under Section 3(2)(5) of SC/ST Act. Therefore, fresh application for bail was moved on behalf of the applicant under said section which was rejected on 30.5.2018. Submission is that since in substantive offence of rape the applicant has been enlarged on bail in the instant case, he may be enlarged on bail under Section 3(2)5 of SC/ST Act. There is no early prospect of conclusion of trial. So, the applicant, who is in jail since 17.02.2018, having no criminal history to his credit, deserves to be released on bail.

¶7

Per contra, learned AGA has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the applicant but could not point out anything material to the contrary.

¶8

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case as also the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties, without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, I am of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail.

¶9

Let applicant-Pancham Yadav be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on his furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions that:-

¶10

1.The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence;

¶11

2.The applicant shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses;

¶12

3.The applicant shall appear on the date fixed by the trial court.

¶13

In case of default of any of the conditions enumerated above, the courts below shall be at liberty to cancel bail of the applicant.

¶14

Order Date :- 19.7.2018/MN/-

Pancham Yadav v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pancham Yadav v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shyam Lal Vs Mathura Prasad

M/S the New Allahabad Welding and Engg. Co. Ald. and Others Vs State of U.P. Thru Collector Alld. and Others

Zarif Ahmed Vs State of U.P.

Km. Rajni Vs Ashok Kumar and Others

Smt. Kalawati Devi and Anr. Vs Lallan and Ors.

Superintending Engineer P.T.W. Vs M/S Crust Cables and Another