Allowed

Mukesh Pandey v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC7 Aug 2018BAIL/29598/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this bail application, the court granted bail to the applicant based on the principle of parity with a co-accused who had already been released. The order imposed specific conditions regarding trial attendance and conduct.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail on executing personal bond and furnishing two sureties under conditions of attending trial and not tampering with witnesses.

Mukesh Pandey Vs State of U.P. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2018)

¶1

Court No. - 55

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 29598 of 2018

¶3

Applicant :- Mukesh Pandey Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Ajay Kumar Misra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Singh,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material on record.

¶6

It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that similarly placed co-accused Vikrant Yadav has already been enlarged on bail by another Bench of this Court vide order dated 30.3.2018 (Annexure-2) passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 11560 of 2018. He further submitted that since the role of the applicant is identical to that of co-accused Vikrant Yadav who has already been enlarged on bail, he is also entitled to be enlarged on bail on the ground of parity.

¶7

The prayer for bail has vehemently been opposed by learned A.G.A.

¶8

Considering the submissions made by learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned A.G.A., this Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for grant of bail on the ground of parity.

¶9

In view of the above, let the applicant, Mukesh Pandey be released on bail on his executing a personal bond and furnishing two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned in Case Crime No. 35 of 2018, under Sections 60(1)/63 Excise Act and Sections 272, 273 I.P.C. P.S. Sikandarpur, district-Ballia with the following conditions :-

¶10

The applicant will continue to attend and co-operate in the trial pending before the court concerned on the date fixed after

¶11

release.

¶12

He will not tamper with the witnesses.

¶13

He will not indulge in any illegal activities during the bail period.

¶14

It is further directed that the identity, status and residence proof of the sureties be verified by the authorities concerned before they are accepted.

¶15

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the trial court will be at liberty to cancel the bail.

¶16

Order Date :- 7.8.2018 Faridul

Mukesh Pandey v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mukesh Pandey 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rohit Vs State of Up

Satya Pal Saini Vs State of U.P.

Rohit Vs State of U.P.

Julfikar Vs State of U.P.

Jitendra @ Gattu Vs State of U.P.

Shailendra Kumar Vs State of U.P.