Allowed

Prabal @ Bal Krishan Pandey v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC21 Jun 2021BAIL/8075/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Criminal miscellaneous bail application dismissed on merits. The Allahabad High Court, Court No. 90, allowed the bail application of Prabal Pandey, who faced charges under Section 306 IPC for aiding suicide. The court released him on bail subject to personal bond and sureties, noting insufficient evidence to prosecute while acknowledging the severe nature of the charge.

What did the court decide?

The applicant is released on bail on executing a personal bond and furnishing two sureties each.

Prabal @ Bal Krishan Pandey Vs State of U.P. — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Allahabad HC (2021)

¶1

Court No. - 90

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 8075 of 2021

¶3

Applicant :- Prabal @ Bal Krishan Pandey Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Mohammad Mustafa,Gaurav Kakkar,Rajendra Kumar Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Ajit Singh,J.

¶5

Counter affidavit filed in the Court today is taken on record.

¶6

Heard Sri Gaurav Kakkar, learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material on record.

¶7

By means of this application, the applicant who is involved in Case Crime No. 188 of 2020, under Section 306 I.P.C., P.S. Trilokpur, districtSiddharth Nagar, is seeking enlargement on bail during the trial.

¶8

The First Information Report of the incident was lodged by the informant against four persons including present accused, alleging therein that her daughter, who was studying in Basti came to her house during Lock-down and the present accused was trying to establish relations with her daughter. It was also alleged in the FIR that on 13.9.2020 at about 11:30 p.m. the present accused along with other co-accused gave some poisonous substance to the daughter of the complainant, as a result of which the daughter of the complainant was got seriously ill. She was admitted to the hospital where she has died during treatment.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the present accused and the deceased was in love relations and the deceased was putting pressure upon the applicant to run away from the house with her but the applicant has refused to go. Being annoyed the deceased might have taken the poisonous substance and she died. He next submits that initially the FIR was lodged under Sections 328, 452 and 304 I.P.C. but after completion of investigation, only the applicant was charge sheeted under Section 306 I.P.C., while other co-ccused were exonerated by the police. Further submission is that there is no evidence against the applicant, which could establish that the applicant has committed offence under Section 306 I.P.C. and there is no evidence of instigation or aid against the applicant regarding suicide committed by the deceased. He lastly submits that the

¶10

applicant, who is in jail since 30.10.2020 and has no criminal antecedents to his credit is entitled to be enlarged on bail during pendency of the trial.

¶11

The prayer for bail has been vehemently opposed by learned A.G.A. but does not dispute the fact that the deceased was in talking terms with the applicant. The postmortem report of the deceased does not indicate any antemortem injuries. Cause of death could not be ascertained.

¶12

Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, severity of the punishment, submissions of learned counsel for the parties and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail during the pendency of the trial.

¶13

Let the applicant, Prabal @ Bal Krishan Pandey be released on bail in the aforesaid case on his executing a personal bond and furnishing two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to the following conditions:-

¶14

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

¶15

He will not tamper with the witnesses.

¶16

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

¶17

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

¶18

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

¶19

The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad, self attested by learned counsel for the applicant along with a self attested identity proof of the said persons (preferably Aadhar Card) mentioning the mobile number (s) to which the said Aadhar Card is linked before the concerned Court/Authority/Official.

¶20

The concerned Court/Authority/Official shall verify the authenticity of such computerized copy of the order from the official website of High

¶21

Court Allahabad and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing.

¶22

Order Date :- 21.6.2021 Faridul

Prabal @ Bal Krishan Pandey v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Prabal @ Bal Krishan 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Aditya Alias Marshall Vs State of U.P.

Vivek Kumar Shukla Vs State of U.P.

Shakir Mirza Vs State of U.P.

Vijay Raj Sharma Vs State of U.P.

Smt. Meenu Sharma Vs State of U.P.

Chandrashekhar @ Guddu Vs State of U.P.