Allowed

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

Allahabad HC24 Jul 2024/709/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single judge allowed a bail application challenging extortion and false implication charges. The court found the ingredients of extortion incomplete and granted bail on personal bond and sureties with strict conditions against tampering and intimidation.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail on furnishing personal bond and two sureties each with specific conditions against tampering and intimidation.

Bhanu Pasi Vs State of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Home… — Money Laundering | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:50172

¶2

Court No. - 14

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 709 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Bhanu Pasi Opposite Party :- State Of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Home Civil Secrt. Lko.

¶5

Counsel for Applicant :- Dharmendra Kumar Trivedi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶6

Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.

¶7

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State and perused the record.

¶8

In the prosecution case, it is alleged that on 22.12.2022 at about 11:40 am, while the informant was going towards his plot, near the RTO office, his vehicle was stopped by the applicant Bhanu Pasi along with one accomplice (co-accused) and demanded Rs. 1,00,000/- as extortion, failing which, he threatened to kill the informant. After seeing people nearby coming, he ran away by flashing his gun.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has explained his criminal history in paragraph 15 of the bail application. He is languishing in jail since 24.12.2022. No offence under Section 386 IPC is made out as the ingredients of Section 383 IPC are missing. There is no delivery of any property in lieu of extortion and thus, no offence under Section 386 IPC has been committed. The applicant has been falsely implicated. False recovery has been shown from the possession of the applicant, to which, there is no eye witness.

¶10

It is further submitted that there is no possibility of the applicant of fleeing away after being released from jail or tampering with the witnesses. In case the applicant is enlarged on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶11

Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid facts as argued by the learned counsel for the applicant.

¶12

On due consideration to the ingredients of Section 383 IPC, coupled with the fact that the applicant is languishing in jail since 24.12.2022 and without expressing any opinion on the 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, Bhanu Pasi, involved in Case Crime No. 544/2022, under Sections 386/504/506 IPC and Section 3/25 of Arms Act, Police Station - Mill Area, District - Raibareli, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two 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:-

¶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 Code.

¶20

(vi) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial

¶21

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 R.C.

¶23

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

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

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

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

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

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.

Neeraj Sahu Vs State of U.P.

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