Pawan Kumar Verma Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:14172

Court No. - 15

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 1182 of 2025

Applicant :- Pawan Kumar Verma Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko Counsel for Applicant :- Kaushal Kishore,Paritosh Shukla,Sukh Deo Singh

¶5

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Anuja Bajpai,Rajiv Kumar Bajpai,Shabana Rizvi

¶6

Hon'ble Shree Prakash Singh,J.

¶7

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Ms. Suparna Mishra, Advocate, holding brief of Sri Rajiv Kumar Bajpai, learned counsel for the complainant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶8

The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant with the prayer to release him on bail during the trial in Case Crime No. 0428 of 2024, under sections 3(5), 109, 191(2) (3), 117(2), 118(2) of the B.N.S.,Police StationGosaiganj, District-Sultanpur.

¶9

Contention of learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the instant matter due to ulterior motive. He added that the general role has been assigned to all the accused persons including the present applicant for assaulting the injured and even the injured has not assigned any specific role to the present applicant. He next added that this could not be segregated that on whose blow, the injured has received the injuries. He submits that the chargesheet has been filed and as such, there is no possibility that the applicant would tamper the evidences or would threaten the witnesses. He next submits that the applicant is a law abiding citizen and he has no previous criminal history and he is languishing in jail since 08-11-2024 and he

¶10

undertakes that in case, he is granted bail, he will not misuse the liberty of the same and would cooperate in the trial proceedings.

¶11

Per contra, learned counsel for the complainant as well as AGA appearing for the State have vehemently opposed the contentions aforesaid and submitted that the applicant is named in the first information report and there are allegations that he has assaulted the injured and the injured has received serious injuries and therefore, he is not entitled for any relief.

¶12

Having heard learned counsels for the parties and after perusal of material placed on record, it transpires that the applicant is languishing in jail since 08-11-2024; the general role has been assigned to all the accused persons including the present applicant; the chargesheet has been filed and as such, there is no possibility that the applicant would tamper the evidences or would threaten the witnesses; there is no previous criminal history of the applicant as has been explained in paragraph 30 of the bail application coupled with the fact that he has undertaken that if he is granted bail, he will not misuse the liberty of the same and would cooperate in the trial proceedings.

¶13

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.

¶14

Let the applicant- Pawan Kumar Verma involved in the aforementioned crime be released on bail,

¶15

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:-

¶16

(1) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/ pressurizing the witnesses, or otherwise during the investigation or trial;

¶17

(2) 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. He 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;

¶18

(3) The applicant 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

¶19

(4) 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, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶20

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. It is clarified that the observations made in this order are strictly confined to the disposal of this bail

¶21

application and must not be construed to have any reflection on the merits of the case.

¶22

Order Date :- 7.3.2025 AKS

¶23

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

Pawan Kumar Verma v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pawan Kumar Verma v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home 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

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

Rakesh Kumar Surana Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Lko. and Another

Piyush Jain Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chif Secy. and Another

Farmaan Vs Union of India Thru. Director of Revenue Intelligence Zonal Office Lko.

Mohd. Miya Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home U.P. Lko.

Talib @ Azam Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.