Allowed

Pawan Kumar v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Dept. of Home Lko.

Allahabad HC19 Oct 2022/915/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This High Court allowed the bail application of Pawan Kumar in a cheating and forgery case. The court relied on the reformative theory of punishment and the larger mandate of Article 21 of the Constitution, noting the applicant's lack of criminal history.

What did the court decide?

The applicant Pawan Kumar is released on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two sureties with conditions regarding presence and non-tampering.

Pawan Kumar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy… — Cheating and Forgery | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 15

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 915 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Pawan Kumar Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Dept. Of Home Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Pankaj Kumar Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Shree Prakash Singh,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Nirmal Kumar Pandey, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶6

The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant with a prayer to release the applicant on bail during the trial in Case Crime No.775 of 2021, under Sections 457, 380, 381, 411 I.P.C., P.S. Kotwali Nagar, District Gonda.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He submits that incident is said to have taken place on 8.10.2022. Nothing has been recovered from the possession of the applicant though on the pointing out of the applicant and one other co-accused person, Rs.4,00,750/- was recovered from the back side of the alleged building. He submits that in fact, the present applicant was not involved in the offence but the police has planted and shown recovery of the aforesaid amount from the pointing out of the applicant. Charge sheet has been filed and, as such, there is no possibility of either fleeing away from the trial or tampering the evidence. There is no criminal history of the applicant, which has been explained in para 16 of the bail application. The applicant is a law abiding citizen, who is languishing in jail since 10.10.2021. In case, the applicant is granted bail, he will not misuse the liberty and will co-operate in the trial proceedings.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that identical situated co-accused Nand Kumar has been enlarged on bail by this Court in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.205 of 2022 vide order dated 10.10.2021 and the applicant is seeking parity of the order aforesaid.

¶9

Per contra, learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that on the pointing out of present applicant and one other co-accused stolen amount was recovered. He further added that as per the evidence, the applicant was found

¶10

involved in committing the offence, as such, he is not entitled to be released on bail but could not dispute the fact that identical situated co-accused has been enlarged on bail.

¶11

Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and after perusal of record, it is evident that identical situated co-accused has been enlarged on bail; nothing has been recovered from the possession of the applicant though on the alleged pointing out of the applicant and one other co-accused person, Rs.4,00,750/was recovered from the back side of the building; charge sheet has been filed and, as such, there is no possibility of either fleeing away from the trial or tampering the evidence or threatening the witnesses; there is no criminal history of the applicant, which has been explained in para 15 of the bail application; the applicant is a law abiding citizen; and the applicant is languishing in jail since 10.10.2021.

¶12

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 considering larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India and, without expressing any view on the merits of the case, I find it to be a case of bail.

¶13

Let the applicant Pawan Kumar involved in the aforementioned crime be released on bail, on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount, to the satisfaction of the court concerned, with the following conditions:-

¶14

(1) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/ pressurizing the witnesses, or otherwise during the investigation or trial;

¶15

(2) 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. He 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;

¶16

(3) 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.; and

¶17

(4) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial

¶18

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, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶19

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.

¶20

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.

¶21

Order Date :- 19.10.2022 A.Kr*

¶22

Digitally signed by AJAY KUMAR Date: 2022.10.21 21:21:19 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Pawan Kumar v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Dept. of Home Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pawan Kumar v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Dept. of Home Lko.

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

Mohd. Ajaz Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Smt. Gaytri Shukla Vs State of U..P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko.

Nitendra Kumar Verma Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Kanhaiya Kaushal Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko

Sanjay Vs State of U.P. Thru Prin.Secy. Home Lucknow and Ors.

Amar Nath Dwivedi (in Person) Vs State of U.P. Thru Addl.Chief Secy./Prin.Secy. Basic Education Lucknow and Ors.