Allowed

Tonu Pandey @ Devshankar Pandey v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC18 Aug 2023BAIL/8611/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Allahabad High Court allowed a second bail application filed by Tonu Pandey under Section 439 CrPC. Despite a prior rejection and pending trial for homicide and affray, the court granted bail citing lack of evidence tampering risk and the applicant's assurance of cooperation, subject to stringent conditions.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail on personal bond and two heavy sureties subject to conditions preventing tampering, ensuring attendance, and complying with trial procedures.

Tonu Pandey @ Devshankar Pandey Vs State of U.P. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:166359

¶2

Court No. - 68

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 8611 of 2022

¶4

Applicant :- Tonu Pandey @ Devshankar Pandey Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Abhinav Gaur,A.Z.Khan,Mohd. Rashid Siddiqui,Rajeev Dhar Dwivedi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Satyendra Pandey

¶5

Hon'ble Dr. Gautam Chowdhary,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned counsel for the State, Sri Satyendra Pandey, learned counsel for the informant and perused the material on record.

¶7

The Crl. Misc. First Bail Application No. 7752 of 2021 has been rejected by another bench of this court vide order dated 16.09.2021.

¶8

This is second bail application under Section 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure has been filed by the applicant Tonu Pandey @ Devshankar Pandey, seeking enlargement on bail during trial in connection with Case Crime No. 95 of 2020, under sections 147, 304, P.S. Gida, Gorakhpur.

¶9

The submission advanced by learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. During trial the P.W. 1 namely Manju Dubey. who is first informant of the case has not supported the prosecution story as alleged in the FIR and has become hostile. Several other submissions in order to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against the applicant have also been placed before the Court. The circumstances which, according to the counsel, led to the false implication of the accused have also been mentioned. It has also been assured on behalf of the applicant that he is ready to cooperate with the process of law and shall faithfully make himself available before the court whenever required and is also ready to accept all the conditions which the Court may deem fit to impose upon him. It is further contended by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is languishing in jail since 19.11.2020 having no criminal history.

¶10

Per contra, learned AGA for the State as well as learned counsel for the informant have opposed the prayer for bail but admitted the fact that during trial the P.W. 1 has become hostile.

¶11

After perusing the record in the light of the submissions made at the bar and after taking an overall view of all the facts and circumstances of this case, the nature of evidence and also the absence of any convincing material to indicate the possibility of tampering with the evidence, this Court is of the view that the applicant may be enlarged on bail.

¶12

Let the applicant- Tonu Pandey @ Devshankar Pandey, be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on furnishing a personal bond and two heavy sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-

¶13

i) The applicant will not tamper with prosecution evidence and will not harm or harass the victim/complainant in any manner whatsoever.

¶14

ii) The applicant will abide the orders of court, will attend the court on every date and will not delay the disposal of trial in any manner whatsoever.

¶15

(iii) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the date 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.

¶16

(iv) The applicant will not misuse the liberty of bail in any manner whatsoever. In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under section 82 Cr.P.C., may be issued and if applicant fails 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 I.P.C.

¶17

(V) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on dates fixed for (1) opening of the case, (2) framing of charge and (3) 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 and the trial court may

¶18

proceed against him under Section 229-A IPC.

¶19

(vi) The trial court may make all possible efforts/endeavour and try to conclude the trial expeditiously after the release of the applicant.

¶20

The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by court concerned and in case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, court concerned will be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicant to prison.

¶21

The bail application is allowed .

¶22

Learned trial court is directed to expedite the trial of the case as early as possible.

¶23

Order Date :- 18.8.2023

¶24

RPD

¶25

Digitally signed by :- RATAN PRAKASH DWIVEDI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Tonu Pandey @ Devshankar Pandey v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Tonu Pandey @ Devshankar Pandey 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

Mufeeda Vs State of U.P.

Rahmat Khan Vs State of U.P.

Rahul Yadav Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Vicky Kumar Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Smt. Reeta Prakash Vs State of U.P. and Another

Sahidullah Vs State of U.P.