Vivek Pandey Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Civil Sectt. Lko

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:50061

¶2

Court No. - 14

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 3338 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Vivek Pandey Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Civil Sectt. Lko

¶5

Counsel for Applicant :- Rajeev Mishra,Mool Shankar Mishra,Vaibhav Srivastava,Vishnu Pratap Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶6

Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.

¶7

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State as well as perused the record.

¶8

The present bail application has been filed by accused-applicant seeking bail in Case Crime No.436 of 2015, under Sections 420, 465, 467, 468, 471 I.P.C., P.S. Kotwali Nagar, District Ayodhya.

¶9

It is alleged in the prosecution case that applicant has filed the returns in lieu of trade tax paid by him to the tune of Rs.1,64,29,930/- on the official website of the department. It is further alleged that when the same were tallied with the bank no such record were matched with the concerned bank neither were found deposited in the government treasury and thus, with an intent to evade the tax, forged challan number and bank name have been shown by the applicant accused in his challan.

¶10

Learned counsel for applicant submits that offences are triable by magistrate, adequate provisions have been given in the U.P. Goods and Service Tax Act, charge-sheet in the case has been filed, applicant has explained the criminal history in para 14 of the bail application and para 12 of the rejoinder affidavit filed today which is taken on record. He submits that the applicant is in jail since 20.11.2023.

¶11

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail prayer.

¶12

On due consideration to the submissions advanced, perusal of the record as also the fact that the applicant is languishing in jail since 20.11.2023, charge-sheet in this case has been filed, offences are triable by magistrate, without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case for enlarging the applicant on bail.

¶13

Accordingly, the bail application is allowed .

¶14

Let the applicant Vivek Pandey be released on bail in aforesaid case crime number subject to his furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court concerned with the following conditions:

¶15

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

¶16

(ii) The applicant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.

¶17

(iii) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any 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 or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶18

(iv) 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.

¶19

(v) 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

¶20

Code.

¶21

(vi) 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. is issued and the 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 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶22

Order Date :- 24.7.2024 Saurabh Yadav/-

¶23

Digitally signed by :- SAURABH YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Vivek Pandey v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Civil Sectt. Lko

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vivek Pandey v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Civil Sectt. Lko

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Vimal Kumar Sonkar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Sectt. Lko.

Awadhesh Kumar Alias Awadhesh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Kailash Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Intzar Vs State of U.P. and Anr.

Bhanu Pasi Vs State of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Home Civil Secrt. Lko.

Neeraj Sahu Vs State of U.P.