Single judge allowed bail to Ankit Pandey in a case involving IPC sections 323 and 364-A. The court emphasized parity with a co-accused already released and found the case fit for bail without assessing merits.
Bail granted on personal bond and two sureties of like amount subject to specific attendance conditions.
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. - 70
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 16707 of 2022
Applicant :- Ankit Pandey Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Bipin Kumar,Mohd. Naushad Siddiqui Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Bare Lal
Hon'ble Piyush Agrawal,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Mr. Bare Lal, learned counsel for informant-opposite party as well as learned Additional Government Advocate for the State of U.P. and perused the record.
The present bail application has been filed by the applicant seeking bail in Case Crime No. 226 of 2021, under Sections 323, 364-A IPC, Police Station- Bhadohi, District - Bhadohi.
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 applicant is a student and doing a short span of business through digital modes like sahaj jan sewa kendra; there were no independent witness to prove the alleged transaction of money; there were major contradiction in the statement of the victim.The applicant has duly disclosed his criminal history in para 3 of the supplementary affidavit. It is stated that after taking note of entire facts and circumstances of the case, co-accused, namely, Adharsh Shukla, has already been enlarged on bail by this Court vide order dated 16.2.2022 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 4984 of 2022. Accordingly, the applicant is also entitled for bail on the ground of parity. It is also submitted that there is no apprehension that after being released on bail, applicant may flee from the course of law or may, otherwise, misuse the liberty of bail and the applicant is in jail since 16.3.2022 and the possibility of conclusion of trial in near future is very bleak.
Learned counsel for informant-opposite party as well as A.G.A. have opposed the prayer for grant of bail, but he has not disputed the above contention made by the learned counsel for the accused-applicant that co-accused has already been released on bail.
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 that co-accused has already been released on bail by this Court and without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, I find it to be a fit case for granting bail.
Let applicant namely Ankit Pandey be released on bail in the aforesaid Case Crime Number on his/her furnishing personal bond and two reliable sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions:-
(i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that applicant 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.
(ii) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his/her counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against applicant under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.
(iii) In case, the applicant misuse the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure presence of the applicant, 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 the applicant, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.
(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 the applicant in accordance with law.
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.
Order Date :- 21.9.2022 Rahul Dwivedi/-
(Piyush Agrawal, J.)
Digitally signed by RAHUL DWIVEDI Date: 2022.09.21 15:12:56 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the applicant is entitled to bail considering co-accused already released and lease of trial.
Ankit Pandey
Piyush Agrawal
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
