Allowed

Hanuman Sevak Pandey v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC24 Mar 2022BAIL/2697/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a bail application under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 406, 471, 506, 120-B IPC, the Court allowed bail for the applicant. The Court noted the applicant's role was identical to a co-accused already granted bail and that no bail cancellation proceedings were pending in a separate matter, allowing bail with standard conditions.

What did the court decide?

The applicant is released on bail on furnishing a personal bond with two sureties, subject to conditions not to tamper with evidence, cooperate in trial, and commit no further crimes.

Hanuman Sevak Pandey Vs State of U.P. and Another — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 79

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 2697 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Hanuman Sevak Pandey Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Saurabh Raj Srivastava,Sr. Advocate Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Ratnendu Kumar Singh,Surya Pratap Singh Parmar

¶4

Hon'ble Mohd. Faiz Alam Khan,J.

¶5

Heard Shri G.S. Chaturvedi, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Shri Saurabh Raj Srivastava, learned counsel for the accused/applicant, Shri S.P.S. Parmar, learned counsel for the informant and Shri Ratnendu Kumar Singh, learned AGA for the State and perused the record.

¶6

This bail application has been moved by the accused/applicant- Hanuman Sevak Pandey for grant of bail, in Case Crime No. 0235/2021, under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 406, 471, 506, 120-B IPC, Police Station Gopiganj, District Bhadohi, during trial.

¶7

The factual matrix of this case is that an FIR was lodged by the informant Krishna Mohan Tiwari on 1.9.2021 at 6.57 hours at Police Station Gopiganj, District Bhadohi stating therein that Vijay Mishra who is an M.L.A. from Gyanpur and his son Vishnu Mishra and M.L.C. Ram Lali Mishra have forcefully grabbed his land and also his firm. It is also stated that the accused persons after threatening him had got some cheques signed and also grabbed his vehicles, pertaining to which informant had earlier lodged a First Information Report at Case Crime No. 273 of 2020.

¶8

It is also stated in the FIR that accused persons were also threatening to make compromise pertaining to which the son of the informant had lodged an FIR at Police Station Gopiganj, District Bhadhohi. Aforesaid Vijay Mishra has forcefully taken and misappropriated 19 vehicles and mechanical equipments described in the first information report and the said vehicles and machines are being illegally used by the applicant and other co-accused persons. About 84 criminal cases are pending against the aforesaid Vijay Mishra.

¶9

During the course of investigation one Girdhari Prasad Pathak was arrested by the S.T.F. on 20.11.2021 and on his statement instant applicant was apprehended and they have stated to have confessed that the vehicles and machines described in the first

¶10

information report are concealed in the Hot Mix Plant of Vijay Mishra and on their pointing six vehicles described in the seizure memo were recovered from Hot Mix Plant of Vijay Mishra situated at Orai-Mirzapur Road.

¶11

Learned Senior Counsel appearing for the applicant submits that all allegations contained in the FIR are false, concocted and politically motivated and the FIR had been lodged for the purpose of wrecking vengeance against the applicant who is a business contemporary of the informant.

¶12

It is further submitted that the informant had earlier lodged an FIR registered at Case Crime No. 273 of 2020, under Sections 387, 347, 449, 506, 323 IPC against Vijay Mishra, Ram Lali Mishra and Vishnu Mishra alleging, amongst other allegations, the fact that the aforesaid Vijay Mishra had forcefully grabbed his firm and started doing business in the name of said firm.

¶13

It is further submitted by learned Senior Counsel that the informant himself is a hardcore criminal and many criminal cases are registered against him and thus allegations contained in the FIR could not believed.

¶14

It is also submitted that as per the avertment of the recovery memo, the vehicles which have been recovered from the Hot Mix Plant of Vijay Mishra is having no concern with the applicant. In fact the informant is a close associate and relative of the aforesaid Vijay Mishra and Ram Lali Mishra and informant, Ram Lali Mishra and one another person had entered into a partnership deed and opened a current account at SBI Gopiganj, Bhadohi. However some dispute has arisen between the informant and Ram Lali Mishra and Ram Lali Mishra had filed proceedings under Section 9 of the Arbitration Act against the informant and now that dispute is pending at the level of High Court in the form of Arbitration Appeal No. 25 of 2021, filed by Ram Lali Mishra and an interim order has also been passed therein.

¶15

It is vehemently submitted that the vehicles shown in the instant FIR are the property of partnership firm and are subject matter of Arbitration Appeal No. 25 of 2021 and applicant is not having any concern with these vehicles and machines and he has been victimized without any fault of him.

¶16

Learned Senior Counsel vehemently submits that the role of the applicant is at par and identical with the role of co-accused Girdhari Prasad Pathak in the alleged crime who has already been granted bail by a Coordinate Bench of this Court, vide order dated 5.3.2022 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application

¶17

No. 3562 of 2022 and he is in jail in this case since 20.11.2021. Charge sheet has already been submitted and criminal history of 3 cases alleged against the applicant has adequately been explained and in all these cases the applicant has been granted bail.

¶18

Shri S.P.S. Parmar, learned counsel for the informant submits that the applicant is accused of a heinous offence and having regard to all the facts and circumstances of the case, it is evident that he has committed offence in violation of the terms of the earlier bail order and his.

¶19

Shri Ratnendu Kumar Singh, learned AGA vehemently submits that though the role of the instant applicant is similar to the role of co-accused Girdhari Prasad Pathak, who has been released on bail by Coordinate Bench of this Court, the applicant has, however, committed crime in violation of the condition imposed in bail order dated 19.2.2021 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 7902 of 2021 pertaining to Case Crime No. 356 of 2011 and therefore the applicant is not entitled to be released on bail.

¶20

On being controverted learned AGA submits that he is not aware whether any bail cancellation proceedings have been initiated against the applicant with regard to the violation of condition of the bail order dated 19.2.2021 wherein it was stipulated that the applicant shall not commit any crime while on bail.

¶21

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having perused the record, it is evident that co-accused of the crime, namely, Girdhari Prasad Pathak has been released on bail by a Coordinate Bench of this Court. There cannot be any doubt that the role assigned to the instant applicant is identical to the role attributed to Girdhari Prasad Pathak who has been granted bail. Admittedly nothing has been placed on record which may suggest that any bail cancellation proceeding has been moved by the State or by the informant for cancellation of the bail of the applicant granted in Case Crime No. 356 of 2011. It is also evident that an arbitration dispute is pending between the informant and Ram Lali Mishra at the level of High Court wherein the vehicles shown in the FIR of the instant case have been shown as the property of the firm pertaining to which arbitration dispute has been initiated and interim orders have also been passed by the High Court. Criminal history of 3 cases of the applicant has been adequately explained. He is in jail in this case since 20.11.2021 and the presence of the applicant could be secured before the trial court by placing adequate conditions. Charge sheet in this case has already been filed and

¶22

the alleged offences against the applicant are triable by the Magistrate.

¶23

Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, severity of punishment, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties and without expressing any opinion on the merits and demerits of the case, I am of the considered view that applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is thus allowed.

¶24

Let the applicant- Hanuman Sewak Pandey involved in the aforesaid case be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond with two sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions:-

¶25

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

¶26

(ii) The applicant shall cooperate in the trial sincerely without seeking any adjournment.

¶27

(iii) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or in commission of any crime after being released on bail.

¶28

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.

¶29

Identity, status and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted.

¶30

Observations made herein-above are only for the purpose of disposal of bail application and the same shall not have any bearing on the trial of the case.

¶31

The case diary be returned immediately to the learned AGA.

¶32

Order Date :- 24.3.2022 Muk

¶33

Digitally signed by MOHD UMAR KHAN Date: 2022.03.24 17:44:47 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Hanuman Sevak Pandey v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Hanuman Sevak Pandey v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Meenu Sain Vs State of U.P.

Irfan Vs State of U.P.

Avinash Bajpai Alias Akash Bajpai Vs State of U.P.

Ranjeet Gaur Vs State of U.P.

Sameer Mirja @ Munna @ Ganja @ Ram Bhai Vs State of U.P.

Dhananjay Singh Vs State of U.P.