Allowed

Pramod @ Malua v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC23 Dec 2021BAIL/1770/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court granted bail to the applicant, holding that he made out a case for relief based on the nature of the offence and the fact that identically placed co-accused were already released on bail by this Court.

What did the court decide?

The applicant was released on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two heavy sureties subject to five conditions including no tampering with evidence.

Pramod @ Malua Vs State of U.P. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2021)

¶1

Court No. - 75

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 1770 of 2019

¶3

Applicant :- Pramod @ Malua Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Shyam Narain Pandey,Rajesh Kumar Pandey,Shravan Kumar Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Mahesh Kumar Kuntal

¶4

Hon'ble Ram Krishna Gautam,J.

¶5

Heard Shri Shyam Narain Pandey, and Shri Rajesh Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A for the State and perused the record.

¶6

It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant submitted that accused applicant is innocent; he has been falsely implicated in this very case crime number; he is of no criminal antecedent; he is languishing in jail since 02.08.2018; identically placed co-accused Surajpal, as well as Chhotu and Sonu, has been granted bail, by another Bench of this Court in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 41146 of 2019 and 36369 of 2020, respectively. He further submits that the role of the applicant is not distinguishable with the role of co-accused, therefore, the applicant is also entitled for bail on the ground of parity, and in case of release of bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in trial.

¶7

On the other hand, learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail.

¶8

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties and keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, the fact that the identically placed co-accused has already been released on bail by this Court and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed.

¶9

Let the applicant Pramod @ Malua involved in Case Crime No. 862 of 2018, under Section 376-D, 504 IPC and Sections 7/8 of POCSO Act, P.S. Khurja Nagar, District Bulandshahar be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two heavy sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions:

¶10

The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the

¶11

trial.

¶12

The applicant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.

¶13

The applicant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted.

¶14

The applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which he is accused, or suspected, of the commission of which he is suspected.

¶15

The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶16

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move bail cancellation application before this Court.

¶17

Order Date :- 23.12.2021 Deepak/

Pramod @ Malua v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pramod @ Malua 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shailesh Yadav @ Nokhai Yadav Vs State of U.P. and Another

Vijay Vs State of U.P. and Another

Pushpendra Vs State of U.P.

Vikash Vs State of U.P.

Syam Chandra Vs State of U.P.

Karu @ Kalicharan Vs State of U.P. and Another