Allowed

Pushpendra v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC4 Dec 2021BAIL/39179/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This bail application was filed by Pushpendra seeking release during trial for offences under IPC and Excise Act. The court considered submissions from both sides, noted no criminal history except the present charge, and held that a case for bail is made out.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two sureties in like amount, subject to conditions regarding trial participation and conduct.

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

¶1

Court No. - 88

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 39179 of 2021

¶3

Applicant :- Pushpendra Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Santosh Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Anil Kumar Ojha,J.

¶5

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

¶6

This bail application under Section 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure has been filed by the applicant Pushpendra seeking enlargement on bail during trial in connection with Case Crime No. 283 of 2021, under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 272, 273 I.P.C. and Section 60A of Excise Act, registered at P.S.- Khair, District- Aligarh.

¶7

Submission of learned counsel for the applicant is that applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated. Applicant has not committed alleged offences.

¶8

No independent witness of the alleged recovery memo. Applicant has nothing to do with the alleged recovery. Nothing has been recovered from this possession. There is no criminal history of the applicant except present one. Further submitted that the applicant is languishing in jail since 04.06.2021.

¶9

Allegation against the applicant is that there is recovery of country made wine one paua Evening Brand from the possession of the applicant and on his pointing out 27 Paua of the same brand.

¶10

Per contra, learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail, but could not dispute the facts as raised by the learned counsel for the applicant.

¶11

Nature of accusation, evidence collected by I.O. in support of the charge, gravity of offence, nature and severity of punishment in case of conviction, complicity of accused and all other attending circumstances were duly considered.

¶12

Considering the rival submissions of learned counsel for the parties, keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case, without commenting upon merits of the case, a case for bail is made out.

¶13

Accordingly, the bail application is allowed .

¶14

Let the applicant Pushpendra involved in the aforesaid case crime, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions;

¶15

The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence or threaten the witnesses.

¶16

The applicant shall co-operate with the trial and shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for charge, evidence when the witnesses are present in the court, statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. and argument.

¶17

During trial, he shall not indulge in any criminal activities.

¶18

In breach of any condition enumerated above, Trial Court shall be at liberty to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law.

¶19

Order Date :- 4.12.2021 v.k.updh.

Pushpendra v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pushpendra 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

Shahid @ Puppy Vs State of U.P.

Markandey Vs State of U P

Reyaz Vs State of U.P.

Sharik @ Khachchar Vs State of U.P.

Chandrabhan Pandey @ Tar Babu Pandey Vs State of U.P.

Ram Kishore Vs State of U.P.