Pankaj Singh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Sectt. Lko

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:12648

Court No. - 15

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 1218 of 2025

Applicant :- Pankaj Singh Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Sectt. Lko Counsel for Applicant :- Pravin Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Shree Prakash Singh,J.

¶6

Vakalatnama filed by Sri Santosh Strivastava, learned counsel on behalf of the complainant is taken on record.

¶7

Supplementary affidavit filed today is also taken on record.

¶8

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

¶9

The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant with a prayer to release the applicant on bail during the trial in Case Crime No.712 of 2019, under Sections 406, 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 Section 120 B I.P.C., P.S. Wazir Ganj, District Lucknow West.

¶10

It is contended by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the present case. He submits that all other co-accused who are alleged to be involved in impersonating the actual owner of the property in question have been granted bail and the case of the present applicant is on better footing. He submits that in fact, there is no cogent piece of evidence against the applicant and he has shown other falsity in the prosecution story. Further submission is that seven cases criminal history of the applicant has been explained in bail application as well as supplementary affidavit and the applicant is languishing in jail since 26.7.2024 and in case, the applicant is granted bail, he will not misuse the liberty and would co-operate in the trial proceedings.

¶11

Per contra, learned A.G.A. vehemently opposed the prayer of bail and submitted that the applicant is involved in committing the aforesaid offence, as such, he is not entitled to be released on bail. But he could not dispute the fact that the applicant case is on better footing than that of the other co-accused who have

¶12

already been granted bail.

¶13

Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and after perusal of record, it transpires that the case of the present applicant is on better footing; there is no cogent piece of evidence against the applicant; seven cases criminal history of the applicant has been explained in bail application as well as supplementary affidavit; the applicant is languishing in jail since 26.7.2024; and he has undertaken that he will not misuse the liberty of bail if granted and would co-operate in the trial proceedings.

¶14

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 case of bail.

¶15

Let the applicant Pankaj Singh involved in the aforementioned crime 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:-

¶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.

¶21

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.

¶22

Order Date :- 3.3.2025 Ram Murti

¶23

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

Pankaj Singh v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Sectt. Lko

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pankaj Singh v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home 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

Indra Mohan Singh and Another Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko. and Another

Ajay Kumar Singh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home U.P. Lko.

Ati Ullah Ansari Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

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

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

Kuldeep Agarwal Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.