Allowed

Pushpendra v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC6 Jun 2022BAIL/4501/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Allahabad High Court allowed a criminal bail application filed by Pushpendra in a case under Sections 392, 411 IPC. The court found merit in the applicant's submissions regarding false implication and planted evidence, granting bail with specific conditions.

What did the court decide?

The applicant- Pushpendra is released on bail subject to furnishing a personal bond and two sureties and complying with specified conditions.

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

¶1

Court No. - 43

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 4501 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Pushpendra Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Ganga Bhushan Mishra,Vijay Pratap Singh

¶4

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Ajay Bhanot,J.

¶6

By means of this bail application the applicant has prayed to be enlarged on bail in Case Crime No. 757 of 2021 at Police Station- Section 39 Noida, DistrictGautam Budh Nagar under Sections 392, 411 IPC. The applicant is in jail since 13.10.2021.

¶7

The bail application of the applicant was rejected by learned Additional Sessions Judge, FTC-I, Gautam Budh Nagar, on 18.11.2021.

¶8

Shri Vijay Pratap Singh, learned counsel for the applicant contends that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the instant case. Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that the FIR arises out of fake police encounter staged by the police authorities to burnish the credentials of the police authorities. The instant case has been registered only to deflect attention from the illegal force used by the applicant against the police authorities. One vehicle, Rs. 47,800/-, one mobile phone were planted from the joint possession of the applicant and two more other co-accused persons. One country made pistol and Rs. 430/- cash has been shown as recovered from the

¶9

applicant. The money belongs to the applicant. The recovery has been planted on the applicant to rationalise the story of fake encounter and the unlawful force used by the police against the applicant. Recovered articles are not relatable to the crime in this case. There is no independent witness to the alleged recovery. Prosecution evidence does not connect the applicant with the offence.

¶10

Explaining the criminal history of the applicant learned counsel for the applicant contends that being from economically weaker section of the society the applicant has become an easy scapegoat for the police authorities who have falsely implicated the applicant in the said cases to burnish their credentials. The applicant has never misused the liberty of bail granted to him in the said cases. The criminal cases do not depict commission of any heinous crime by the applicant and have no bearing on this bail application. The applicant is not a flight risk and there is no possibility of his influencing witnesses, tampering with the evidence or reoffending.

¶11

Shri Sunil Kumar Srivastava, learned AGA for the State could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions from the record. Learned AGA does not contest the criminal history of the applicant as disclosed in the bail application.

¶12

I see merit in the submissions of the learned counsel

¶13

for the applicant and hold that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail.

¶14

In the light of the preceding discussion and without making any observations on the merits of the case, the bail application is allowed.

¶15

Let the applicant- Pushpendra be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions.

¶16

(i) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.

¶17

(ii) The applicant will not influence any witness.

¶18

(iii) The applicant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted.

¶19

(iv) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶20

In case of breach of any of the above condition, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move bail cancellation application before this Court.

¶21

Order Date :- 6.6.2022 Pravin

¶22

Digitally signed by PRAVIN VERMA Date: 2022.06.07 10:28:45 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Pushpendra v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pushpendra 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Munna Vs State of U.P.

Vijay Kumar Yadav Vs State of U.P.

Ashwani Joshi Vs State of U.P.

Aman Tauseef Vs State of U.P. and Another

Arjun Vs State of U.P.

Raj Kumar Jain Vs State of U.P.