Allowed

Pawan Gaud v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC25 May 2022BAIL/15924/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Application for bail granted to applicant in a case concerning Section 307 IPC. Court held it was a fit case for bail after evaluating arguments of false implication and lack of prosecution evidence, noting applicant was already released in a related case. Bail granted on personal bond with strict conditions regarding court attendance and panel selection.

What did the court decide?

Release on bail upon furnishing personal bond and two sureties with conditions regarding court presence and panel verification.

Pawan Gaud Vs State of U.P. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 78

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 15924 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Pawan Gaud Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Yadavendra Dwivedi,Ageet Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Saurabh Lavania,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned Additional Government Advocate for the State of U.P. and perused the record.

¶6

The present bail application has been filed by the applicant seeking bail in Case Crime No. 10 of 2022, under Sections 307 IPC, Police Station-Bhadohi, District-Bhadohi.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present crime. It is submitted that the implication of the applicant is based upon confessional statement of the co-accused Rajesh Bind @ Khetai Bind, who was arrested at the situs of the crime. Except the confessional statement, which is inadmissible in evidence, there is no evidence available with the prosecution to connect the applicant with the crime in issue. As per story of the prosecution indicated in the FIR, which was lodged under Section 307 IPC the co-accused Rajesh Bind @ Khetai Bind and the applicant Pawan Gaud opened fire on the police party. This story is completely fake one. No police personnel sustained any injury in the incident. On the other hand, as appears from the story of the prosecution, that co-accused sustained injury.

¶8

He further submitted that after alleged recovery the applicant was implicated in Case Crime No. 02 of 2022, under Sections 411, 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC and in this case, the applicant has already been released on vide order dated 24.05.2022 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.15898 of 2022. The copy of the bail order placed before this Court is taken on record. Accordingly, the applicant is entitled for bail. It is also submitted that there is no apprehension that after being released on bail, he may flee from the course of law or may otherwise misuse the liberty of bail and the applicant is in jail since 08.01.2022.

¶9

Learned A.G.A., on the basis of instructions received, opposed the prayer for grant of bail, however, he could not dispute the above contention made by the learned counsel for the accusedapplicant.

¶10

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, perusing the record and also considering the nature of allegations, arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties and keeping in mind the recovery memo and the statement of coaccused and without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, I find it to be a fit case for granting bail.

¶11

Let applicant - Pawan Gaud be released on bail in the aforesaid Case Crime Number on his furnishing personal bond and two reliable sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions:-

¶12

(i) 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.

¶13

(ii) 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.

¶14

(iii) In case, the applicant misuse 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 fail 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.

¶15

(iv) 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 liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.

¶16

(v) The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad.

¶17

(vi) The computer generated copy of such order shall be self attested by the counsel of the party concerned.

¶18

(vii) The concerned Court/Authority/Official shall verify the authenticity of such computerized copy of the order from the official website of High Court Allahabad and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing.

¶19

Any violation of above conditions will be treated misuse of bail and learned Court below will be at liberty to pass appropriate order in the matter regarding cancellation of bail.

¶20

Order Date :- 25.5.2022 Vinay/-

¶21

Digitally signed by VINAY KUMAR Date: 2022.05.26 10:25:33 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Pawan Gaud v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pawan Gaud 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

Niranjan Ram Vs State of U.P.

Chandra Mohan Prajapati Vs State of U.P.

Rajesh Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Abhishek Chauhan Vs State of U.P.

Neeraj Vs State of U.P.

Rakesh @ Pilua Vs State of U.P.