Bhudev Alias Chhoti Wala Pandit Vs State of U.P. — Cheating and Forgery | Allahabad HC (2025)

Bhudev Alias Chhoti Wala Pandit Vs State of U.P. — Cheating and Forgery | Allahabad HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Applicant Bhudev alias Chhoti Wala Pandit to be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to conditions that he (i) appear on the dates fixed by the trial court, (ii) not tamper with the prosecution evidence, and (iii) not pressurize the prosecution witnesses; in case of breach, the prosecution is at liberty to move a bail cancellation application before this Court.

Issue for consideration

Whether the applicant Bhudev alias Chhoti Wala Pandit should be enlarged on bail in Case Crime No. 522 of 2025 under Sections 303(2), 318(4), 338, 336(2), 340(2), 111(2) B of B.N.S., Police Station Shikohabad, District Firozabad, during the pendency of trial.

Court's answer

This Court prima facie finds that the applicant was not named in the first information report; his name was subsequently disclosed by the informant in his statement under Section 180 B.N.S.S., and the alleged two tractors were recovered from the possession of co-accused Vijendra and Devki Nandan.

Ratio / Principle

The applicant has remained confined for more than two months with no hope of early conclusion of trial, and no reasonable apprehension has been brought to the fore by the State that, if enlarged on bail, he would tamper with the evidence, delay the trial or intimidate the witness.

Key takeaways

Without commenting on the merits of the case, the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail.ratio¶13

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

BAIL GRANTED — High Court of Judicature at Allahabad (Vivek Varma, J.; October 17, 2025) allowed Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. - 36394 of 2025 arising from Case Crime No. 522 of 2025 under Sections 303(2), 318(4), 338, 336(2), 340(2), 111(2) B of B.N.S., Police Station Shikohabad, District Firozabad. Prima facie the applicant was not named in the first information report; his name surfaced only through the informant's subsequent statement under Section 180 B.N.S.S. (contended by counsel to be an afterthought), and the two alleged tractors were recovered from the possession of co-accused Vijendra and Devki Nandan. The applicant had been confined since 13.8.2025 (over two months), with no hope of early conclusion of trial and no reasonable apprehension voiced by the State of evidence-tampering, trial-delay or witness-intimidation. Without commenting on merits, the Court held him entitled to bail on a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount, conditioned on appearance before the trial court, non-tampering with prosecution evidence and non-pressurizing of prosecution witnesses; breach entitles the prosecution to seek cancellation before this Court.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 36394 of 2025

Bhudev Alias Chhoti Wala Pandit

.....Applicant(s)

Versus
State of U.P.	.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s)	: Bharat Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)	: G.A.
Court No.- 64

HON'BLE VIVEK VARMA, J.

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and Sri V.P. Tripathi, learned AGA for the State-opposite party. Perused the material available on record.

The present bail application has been filed with a prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 522 of 2025, under Sections 303(2), 318(4), 338, 336(2), 340(2), 111(2) B of B.N.S., Police StationShikohabad, District - Firozabad, during the pendency of trial.

Counsel for the applicant contends that the applicant was not named in the first information report and has been falsely implicated in the present case. The name of the applicant was subsequently disclosed by the informant in his statement under Section 180 B.N.S.S. It is contended that the said statement is an afterthought. Further, the alleged two tractors were recovered from the possession of co-accused Vijendra and Devki Nandan. The applicant has no role in the alleged incident. The applicant has no criminal antecedents. The applicant is not a member of any organized crime syndicate nor he acted on behalf of such syndicate. The applicant is in jail since 13.8.2025 and in case he is enlarged on bail, he will not misuse the said liberty.

Learned AGA has opposed the prayer for bail but could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions from the record.

Having heard counsel for the parties and having perused the record, this Court prima facie finds that the applicant was not named in the first information report; his name was subsequently disclosed by the informant in

BAIL No. 36394 of 2025

2

his statement under Section 180 B.N.S.S. and the alleged two tractors were recovered from the possession of co-accused Vijendra and Devki Nandan. Moreover, the applicant has remained confined for more than two months and there is no hope of early conclusion of trial, more so when no reasonable apprehension has been brought to the fore by the State that the applicant, if enlarged on bail, would either tamper with the evidence or delay the trial or intimidate the witness, without commenting on the merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail.

Let the applicant Bhudev alias Chhoti Wala Pandit , involved in the aforesaid case 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 subject to the conditions that he:

(i) shall appear on the date fixed by the trial court;

(ii) shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence; and,

(iii) shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses.

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move bail cancellation application before this Court.

October 17, 2025 Manish Kr

(Vivek Varma,J.)

Digitally signed by :- MANISH KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad