Pawan Kumar and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lucknow

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:82115

Court No. - 15

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 11234 of 2024

Applicant :- Pawan Kumar And 2 Others Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lucknow Counsel for Applicant :- Sarjoo Ram,Akhilesh Pratap Singh,Chandan Prasad,Mamta Rawat

¶5

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶6

Hon'ble Shree Prakash Singh,J.

¶7

Rejoinder AfÏdavit filed today on behalf of the applicants is taken on record.

¶8

Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶9

The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicants with the prayer to release them on bail during the trial in Case Crime No. 044 of 2021, under sections 147, 148, 452, 323, 504, 506, 308, 324, 325 of the I.P.C., Police StationFatanpur, District-Pratapgarh.

¶10

Contention of learned counsel for the applicants is that the applicants are innocent and have falsely been implicated in the instant matter due to ulterior motive. He added that the general role has been assigned to all the applicants in the first information report and even the injured persons have also assigned the general role to the present applicants. He next added that at this stage, the role of the applicants cannot be segregated and further added that the chargesheet has been filed and as such, there is no possibility that the applicants would tamper the evidences or would threaten the witnesses.

¶11

Adding his arguments, he submits that the applicants have no previous criminal history, as is mentioned in paragraph no. 14 of the bail

¶12

application and they are languishing in jail since 10-10-2024. Further submitted that the applicants undertake that if they are granted bail, they will not misuse the liberty of the same and would cooperate in the trial proceedings.

¶13

Per contra, learned AGA appearing for the State has opposed the contentions aforesaid and submits that there are serious allegations against the applicants and as such, they are not entitled for any relief.

¶14

Having heard learned counsels for the parties and after perusal of material placed on record, it transpires that the applicants are languishing in jail since 10-10-2024; there is no previous criminal antecedent of the applicants as has been explained in paragraph 14 of the bail application coupled with the fact that the applicants have undertaken that if they are granted bail, they will not misuse the liberty of the same and would cooperate in the trial proceedings.

¶15

Considering the submissions of learned counsel of both sides, nature of accusation and severity of punishment in case of conviction, nature of supporting evidence, prima facie satisfaction of the Court in support of the charge, reformative theory of punishment and considering larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India and, without expressing any view on the merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case of bail.

¶16

Let the applicants- Pawan Kumar, Vikash Kumar & Radheyshyam , involved in the aforementioned crime be released on bail, on their furnishing personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount, to the satisfaction of the court concerned, with the following conditions:-

¶17

(1) The applicants shall not tamper with the

¶18

prosecution evidence by intimidating/ pressurizing the witnesses, or otherwise during the investigation or trial;

¶19

(2) The applicants shall file an undertaking to the effect that they shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. They shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through their counsel. In case of their absence, without sufÏcient cause, the trial court may proceed against them under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code;

¶20

(3) The applicants shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C.; and

¶21

(4) In case, the applicants misuse the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure their presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicants fail to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶22

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

¶23

It is clarified that the observations made in this order are strictly confined to the disposal of this bail application and must not be construed to have any reflection on the merits of the case.

¶24

Order Date :- 9.12.2024 AKS

¶25

Digitally signed by :- ANUJ KRISHNA SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Pawan Kumar and 2 Others v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lucknow

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pawan Kumar and 2 Others v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lucknow

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

Satish Chandra @ Chhotey Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Ram Khilawan Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko.

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

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

Suresh Chandra vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Deptt. Home Civil Sectt. Lko and 2 Others

Raghvendra Pratap Singh vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.