Allowed

Suraj Pandey v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC11 Jun 2021BAIL/12465/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court heard a bail application challenging false implication. Finding prima facie satisfaction of bail requirements under Article 21 and referring Dataram Singh, the Court granted bail with conditions.

What did the court decide?

Omkar Yadav released on bail on personal bond and two heavy sureties in Case Crime No.341 of 2020, with conditions to attend trial, not tamper with witnesses, and no illegal activities.

Suraj Pandey Vs State of U.P. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2021)

¶1

Court No. - 67

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 12465 of 2021

¶3

Applicant :- Suraj Pandey Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Maya Pati Pandey,Sunil Kumar Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Ashutosh Kumar Tiwari,Ram Bilas Yadav

¶4

Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Singh,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Sanjay Singh, learned AGA-I, appearing for the State and perused the material brought on record.

¶6

It has been contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. It is next contended that the applicant has no concern with the alleged incident. It is further submitted that the alleged incident is said to have taken place in the night hours and some unknown persons have caused injuries to the injured. Several other submissions in order to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against the applicant have also been placed forth before the Court. The circumstances which, according to the counsel, led to the false implication of the accused has also been touched upon at length. It has been assured on behalf of the applicant that he is ready to cooperate with the process of law and shall faithfully make himself available before the court whenever required. It has also been submitted that the applicant is languishing in jail since 2.11.2020. It has been pointed out that the applicant has no criminal history.

¶7

Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer.

¶8

Having heard the submissions of learned counsel of both sides, nature of accusation and the severity of punishment in case of conviction and the nature of supporting evidence, prima facie satisfaction of the Court in support of the charge, reformative theory of punishment, and larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India, the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh v. State of U.P. and another, reported in (2018) 2 SCC 22 and without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, I find it to be a case of bail.

¶9

Let applicant- Omkar Yadav , be released on bail in Case Crime No.341 of 2020, under Sections- 307 IPC, Police Station- Kotwali Bansi, District- Siddharth Nagar, on furnishing a personal bond and two heavy sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of magistrate/court concerned, subject to following conditions:-

¶10

The applicant will attend and co-operate the trial proceedings pending before the court concerned on the date fixed after release.

¶11

He will not tamper with the witnesses.

¶12

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

¶13

The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by the court concerned and in case of breach of any of the above conditions, the court below shall be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicant to prison.

¶14

It is clarified that the observations, if any, made in this order are strictly confined to the disposal of this bail application and must not be construed to have any reflection on the ultimate merits of the case.

¶15

In case of breach of of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.

¶16

The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad.

¶17

The computer generated copy of such order shall be self attested by the counsel of the party concerned.

¶18

The concerned Court/Authority/Official shall verify the authenticity of such computerized copy of the order from the official website of High Court Allahabad and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing.

¶19

The trial court is directed to expedite the trial of the present case and conclude the same expeditiously preferably within a period of six months from the date of production of a certified copy of this order, if there is no legal impediment.

¶20

Order Date :- 11.6.2021 Dev/-

Suraj Pandey v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Suraj 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

Kamal Singh Rajpoot Vs State of U.P.

Khalid Vs State of Up

Tufail Ahmad Alias Nanhu Vs State of U.P

Kavita Vs State of U.P.

Asif Vs State of U.P.

Sharafat and Another Vs State of U.P.