Allowed

Akhilesh Kumar Pandey v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Dept. Lko.

Allahabad HC1 Apr 2024BAIL/3152/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Application for bail filed by Akhilesh Kumar Pandey, accused in a case of abetment to suicide under Section 306 IPC. Court allowed bail citing parity with a co-accused and lack of material suggesting abetment ingredients, imposing standard conditions.

What did the court decide?

Application allowed; applicant released on bail furnishing a personal bond and two sureties with specific conditions.

Akhilesh Kumar Pandey vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy… — Cheque Dishonour | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:45811

¶2

Court No. - 14

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 3152 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Akhilesh Kumar Pandey Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Dept. Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Rajeev Mishra,Mool Shankar Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,R.B.S. Rathaur

¶5

Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.

¶6

1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned counsel for the complainant, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State and perused the record.

¶7

2. It is alleged in the prosecution case that younger sister of the informant was married on 5.5.2007 with the applicant. Out of the wedlock, the couple had two children. Mother and sister of the applicant are residing for the last three years in Ayodhya. It is further alleged that all the accused persons used to mentally and physically torture the deceased. It is also alleged that in the month of January, sister of the informant fell seriously ill. She was not permitted to meet him and after dialing number 112 with the aid of police, she met the informant. On 22.10.2023 at about 10.00p.m., the applicant has informed on phone that his sister has committed suicide.

¶8

3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that general and sweeping allegation has been made in the entire prosecution case. The applicant is in Indian Army. The marriage of the deceased took place in the year 2007 and since then, more than fifteen years have passed. There is no material collected by the investigating officer so as to make out a case of abetment to commit the offence of suicide. Ingredients of sections 107/306 I.P.C. are missing.

¶9

The co-accused Smt. Kismati Pandey alias Kismata Pandey

¶10

who was assigned similar role has been enlarged on bail vide order dated 7.2.2024 passed in Bail No.416 of 2024. The applicant's counsel claims parity. The applicant is in jail since 20.11.2023.

¶11

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

¶12

4. Learned A.G.A. and learned counsel for the complainant opposed the prayer for bail. The complainant's counsel has submitted that the applicant is the husband and it is not a case of parity.

¶13

5. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the coaccused Smt. Kismati Pandey has been granted on bail, charge sheet has been filed, ingredients of sections 107/306 I.P.C., arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties, the period for which the applicant is in jail and without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, I find it to be a fit case for enlarging the applicant on bail.

¶14

6. Let the applicant Akhilesh Kumar Pandey, involved in Case Crime No.612 of 2023 under section 306 I.P.C., P.S. Kotwali Ayodhya, district Ayodhya/Faizabad 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 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.

¶21

7. The application is allowed accordingly.

¶22

Order Date :- 5.7.2024 kkb/

¶23

Digitally signed by :- KRISHNA KUMAR BARANWAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Akhilesh Kumar Pandey v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Dept. Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Akhilesh Kumar Pandey v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Dept. Lko.

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

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Mohd. Rehan @ Rehan vs Special A.C.J.M. (C.B.I) (a.P.) Lko. and Another

Raj Mishra @ Raju vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Pushker Tiwari vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and 2 Others

Manish Kumar vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home and Another

Deepak Gupta @ Ram Chandra Gupta vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Ashish vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin.Secy. Home