Allowed

Phoolchandra Pandey v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home and 4 Others

Allahabad HC2 Jun 2022/320/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Allahabad High Court allowed the criminal appeal preferring to set aside the rejection of bail. The Court granted bail to the appellant, Phoolchandra Pandey, on the ground of parity, noting that a co-accused with a similar role had already been released. The order imposed specific conditions regarding presence and conduct.

What did the court decide?

Appellant enlarged on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two sureties subject to specific conditions regarding attendance and conduct.

Phoolchandra Pandey Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy… — Caste Atrocities | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 12

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 320 of 2022

¶3

Appellant :- Phoolchandra Pandey Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home And 4 Others Counsel for Appellant :- Sumit Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Ashok Kumar Srivastava

¶4

Hon'ble Dinesh Kumar Singh,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the accused-appellant, Sri Bhanu Pratap Singh, learned A.G.A. and Sri Ashok Srivastava, learned counsel for the complainant.

¶6

This appeal has been preferred under Section 14-A(2) of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (for short ‘the Act’) against impugned order dated 20.1.2022 passed by learned Special Judge, (SC/ST Act), Pratapgarh in Bail Application No.3141 of 2021, arising out of Case Crime No. 342 of 2020, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 302, 323, 504 and 506 IPC and Sections 3 (1) (Da), 3 (1)(Dha), 3 (2) 5 and 3 (2) 5-A of the SC/ST Act, Police Station Raniganj, District Pratapgarh, whereby rejecting the bail application of the accused-appellant.

¶7

Learned counsel for the accused-appellant submits that coaccused, Surendra Pandey alias Neeraj, having similar role, has been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 9.5.2022 in Criminal Appeal No.658 of 2022. He, therefore, prays that the accused-appellant should also be enlarged on bail on the ground of parity.

¶8

Sri Bhanu Pratap Singh, learned A.G.A. and Sri Ashok Srivastava, learned counsel for the complainant have opposed the prayer for bail, but not disputed the aforesaid facts.

¶9

Considering the above facts and circumstances of the case, coupled with the contentions raised by the learned counsel for

¶10

both sides, and also the fact that co-accused, having similar role, has been granted bail by this Court, the accused-applicant is entitled to be released on bail.

¶11

Let appellant-Phholchandra Pandey be enlarged on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following additional conditions:-

¶12

(i) The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence of witnesses and shall not commit any offence.

¶13

(ii) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law.

¶14

(iii) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶15

(iv) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶16

(v) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. If in the opinion of the trial court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of

¶17

liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law. Subject to above noted terms, the appeal is allowed and the impugned order dated 20.1.2022 is hereby set aside.

¶18

Order Date :- 2.6.2022 Rao/-

¶19

Digitally signed by CHEBROLU SRINIVASA RAO Date: 2022.06.02 17:59:10 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Phoolchandra Pandey v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home and 4 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Phoolchandra Pandey v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home and 4 Others

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

Rinkal Vs State of U.P.

State of U.P. Major-B.C. Vs Shilajeet @ Jilajeet

Ganesh Prabhakar Tiwari Vs State of U.P. through its Secretary Home

Fuzail Ahmad Vs State of U.P.

Mohit Singh @ Mukteshwar Vs State of U.P. and 2 Ors.

Yogendra Kumar Yaday Vs State of U.P. and Others