Bail granted to applicants facing charges of kidnappings and robberies in Lakhimpur Kheri. Release conditioned on personal bond, sureties, and strict adherence to trial dates.
Order was granting bail with personal bond and two sureties each, subject to compliance of trial court's conditions of appearance and no adjournments.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 27
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 15523 of 2021
Applicant :- Shivam Pandey @ Shiva And Anr. Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru Prin.Secy. Home Counsel for Applicant :- Dinesh Chandra Yadav,Aprajita Tiwari,Jai Narayan Pandey,Kaustubh Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Adil Aziz Khan,Mohd. Shahid Akhtar
Hon'ble Shree Prakash Singh,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicants, Mohd. Shahid Akhtar, learned counsel appearing on behalf of Raziya wife of Mobin, Sri Aniruddh Kumar Singh, learned A.G.A.-I for the State and perused the record.
Instant bail application has been filed with a prayer to release the applicants on bail during the trial in Case Crime No. 894 of 2018, under Sections 364, 392, 419, 420 IPC, Police Station- Kotwali Sadar, District Lakhimpur Kheri.
Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants are innocent and they have been falsely implicated in the present case. He next added that incident is said to be taken place on 8th August, 2018 but FIR was lodge after two days. The applicants are not named in the first information report and their names came into light after two and half years on the statement of Raziya wife of Mobin (deceased) and PW 3 Salim. He added that Raziya and Salim were cross examined before the trail court, wherein they have demolished the story of prosecution. He further added that last seen evidence was witnessed by Salim but later on, in cross examination, Salim (PW3) stated that he had never seen the present applicant as has been mentioned in the statement. He next added that there is no fate of the trial as both the witnesses have turned hostile. He next added that there is no previous criminal antecedent of the applicant and prosecution has failed till date to corroborate the prosecution story so as to connect the present applicants in the instant matter. In case, they are granted bail, they will not misuse the liberty of bail and would cooperate in the trial proceedings.
On the other hand,learned counsel appearing for Raziya
wife of Mobin (deceased) as well as learned A.G.A. for the State, vehemently opposed the contention aforesaid and submits that there are serious allegations in the first information report and husband of Raziya is still missing and further last seen evidence is also corroborating the prosecution story, as such the applicants are not entitled to be released on bail.
Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and after perusal of record, it is evident that the applicants are not named in the FIR; FIR is delayed by two days; names of the present applicants came into light after two years in the statement of Raziya and Salim but during the cross examination they demolished the prosecution story and denied the statement; there is no previous criminal antecedent.
Considering the submissions of learned counsel of both sides, nature of accusation and severity of punishment in case of conviction, nature of supporting evidence, prima facie satisfaction of the Court in support of the charge, reformative theory of punishment and without expressing any view on the merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case for bail.
Let the applicants- Shivam Pandey @ Shiva and Ritesh Pandey @ Sonu involved in the aforementioned crime be released on bail, on their furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount, to the satisfaction of the court concerned, with the following conditions:-
proceedings against them, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.
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.
It is clarified that the observations 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 merits of the case.
Order Date :- 2.11.2022 A.Kr*
Digitally signed by AJAY KUMAR Date: 2022.11.03 20:16:53 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench
2 issues framed by the court
Whether applicants named in late FIR with hostile witnesses are entitled to bail during trial.
Whether the severity of charges precludes bail under reformative theory.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Shivam Pandey @ Shiva and Anr.
State Of U.P
Prakash Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
