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

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:10276

Court No. - 15

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 95 of 2025

Applicant :- Pappu Chauhan Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Of Home Lko Counsel for Applicant :- Naveen Chandra Upadhyay Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Shree Prakash Singh,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State and perused the record.

¶7

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. 295 of 2024, under Sections 305(a), 331(4), 317(2) of Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita (BNS), 2023, Police Station Nawabganj, District Gonda.

¶8

Contention of learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant is innocent and he has falsely been implicated in the instant matter due to ulterior motive. He submits that applicant is not named in the First Information Report. The name of the applicant came into light in the confessional statement of the co-accused persons. He further submits that the police has planted the applicant in the matter on the basis of suspicion and there is no cogent piece of evidence against him. He has shown other falsity in the prosecution case. He added that the applicant has two cases criminal history which has been explained in the supplementary affidavit. He further submits that the chargesheet has been filed in the case, therefore, there is no possibility that the applicant would tamper the evidences or threaten the witnesses. He further added that the applicant is a law abiding citizen and he is languishing in jail since 20.09.2024 and he undertakes that he will not misuse the liberty of bail, if granted and would cooperate in the trial proceedings, thus, submission is that the applicant may be enlarged on bail.

¶9

Per contra, learned AGA appearing for the State has opposed the contentions aforesaid and has submitted that the applicant is involved in committing the offence, as such, he is not entitled for bail.

¶10

Having considered the submissions of learned counsels for the parties and after perusal of the record, it transpires that the applicant is not named in the FIR; the name of the applicant came into light in the confessional statement of co-accused persons; the applicant has been planted in the matter by the

¶11

police on the basis of suspicion; the applicant has explained the criminal history and the chargesheet has been filed in the matter, therefore, there is no chance of tampering the evidences and the applicant is languishing in jail since 20.09.2024 and he has undertaken that he will not misuse the liberty of bail, if granted and would cooperate in the trial proceedings.

¶12

Considering the submissions of learned counsels for the parties, 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.

¶13

Let the applicant- Pappu Chauhan 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:-

¶14

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

¶15

(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;

¶16

(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

¶17

(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.

¶18

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

¶19

cancel the bail and send the applicant to prison.

¶20

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.

¶21

Order Date :- 17.2.2025 kkv/

¶22

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

Pappu Chauhan v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pappu Chauhan v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of 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

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

Ram Chandra and Another Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

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

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

Rahul Dixit Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko.

Anil Kumar Gupta Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko. and Another