Allowed¶15

Pramod Kumar Mandal v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC7 Jul 2025NA430/5/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Suspension of sentence; Section 430(2) BNSS; Criminal Misc. Application No. 5 of 2025; Criminal Appeal No. 63 of 2025; Section 420 IPC; Section 66D Information Technology Act; Case Crime No. 48 of 2021; Police Station Cyber Crime, Varanasi; seven years rigorous imprisonment; custody exceeding three years; parity with co-convict Mantu Kumar Mandal; bail bonds and surety bonds; Chief Judicial Magistrate Varanasi; appellate court rejection dated 07.05.2025; Manoj Bajaj, J.; Allahabad High Court; application allowed.

What did the court decide?

Remaining sentence of the applicant suspended during pendency of Criminal Appeal No. 63 of 2025, subject to his furnishing the requisite bail bonds and surety bonds to the satisfaction of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Varanasi. ¶15

Pramod Kumar Mandal vs State of U.P. — Cheating and Forgery | Allahabad HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶15

Issue for consideration

Whether the remaining sentence of the applicant should be suspended during the pendency of Criminal Appeal No. 63 of 2025, in view of the period of custody undergone and the parity urged with co-convict Mantu Kumar Mandal.

¶8

Court's answer

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record, particularly the period undergone by the applicant, the Court deemed it appropriate to suspend the remaining sentence of the applicant during pendency of the appeal.

¶11

Ratio / Principle

The suspension is made without any expression of opinion on the merits of the pending appeal, and is subject to the applicant furnishing the requisite bail bonds and surety bonds to the satisfaction of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Varanasi.

¶14

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Allahabad High Court (Manoj Bajaj, J.) allowed a Criminal Miscellaneous Application under Section 430(2) BNSS seeking suspension of sentence. The applicant, convicted and sentenced on 29.03.2025 by the trial court in Case Crime No. 48 of 2021 (Sections 420 IPC and 66D Information Technology Act, Police Station Cyber Crime, District Varanasi) to seven years' rigorous imprisonment, had undergone more than three years in custody. His application for suspension of sentence during pendency of Criminal Appeal No. 63 of 2025 had been rejected by the appellate court on 07.05.2025. Counsel urged parity with co-convict Mantu Kumar Mandal, whose sentence had been suspended by this Court on 8.9.2025 in Criminal Misc. Application U/S 430(2) BNSS No.8 of 2025; the State opposed on the ground of seriousness of the offence but did not dispute the custodial period. Having perused the record, particularly the period undergone, the Court suspended the remaining sentence during pendency of the appeal, subject to furnishing requisite bail and surety bonds to the satisfaction of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Varanasi, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the appeal.

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. APPLICATION U/S 430(2) BNSS No. - 5 of 2025

Pramod Kumar Mandal

.....Applicant(s)

Versus

State of U.P.

		.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s)	: Aushim Luthra, Pranav	Tiwary
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)	: G.A.
Court No.- 81

¶7

HON'BLE MANOJ BAJAJ, J.

¶8

Applicant-Pramod Kumar Mandal is aggrieved against the order dated 07.05.2025 passed by the appellate court, whereby the applicant's application seeking suspension of sentence during pendency of Criminal Appeal No. 63 of 2025; titled Pramod Kumar Mandal vs. State of U.P., arising against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 29.03.2025 passed by the trial court in Case Crime No. 48 of 2021, under Section 420 IPC and Section 66D Information Technology Act, Police Station Cyber Crime, District Varanasi, has been rejected.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant has produced the custody certificate of the applicant dated 19.8.2025 issued by Superintendent, Central Jail, Bhopal and submitted that after registration of the F.I.R., the applicant was arrested on 5.8.2022 and remained in custody as an undertrial till his conviction. Learned counsel has pointed out that the applicant has been awarded seven years rigorous imprisonment, who by now has undergone a period of more than three years in custody. Learned counsel further submits that the appellate court has not carefully examined the background of the case, particularly the period undergone by the applicant while refusing to suspend the sentence imposed by the trial court vide order dated 29.3.2025. Learned counsel for appellant has produced the order dated 8.9.2025 passed by this Court in Criminal Misc. Application U/S 430(2) BNSS No.8 of 2025, suspending the sentence of the co-convict namely, Mantu Kumar Mandal and contended that the case of the applicant, is at par with him. He prays for suspension of sentence.

¶10

Learned State Counsel, while opposing the prayer on the ground that offence is serious, does not dispute the custodial period undergone by the applicant.

¶11

After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and having perused the record, particularly the period undergone by the applicant, this Court deems it appropriate to suspend the remaining sentence of the applicant during pendency of the appeal.

¶12

NA430 No. 5 of 2025

¶13

¶14

Resultantly, without meaning any expression of opinion on the merits of the pending appeal, the remaining sentence of the applicant is suspended, subject to his furnishing the requisite bail bonds and surety bonds to the satisfaction of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Varanasi.

¶15

The application is allowed.

¶16

(Manoj Bajaj,J.)

¶17

September 23, 2025 P.S.Parihar

¶18

Digitally signed by :- POORAN SINGH PARIHAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Pramod Kumar Mandal v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pramod Kumar Mandal v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Parasnath Verma vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Sayem Yazdani vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another

Arvind Kumar Singh vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Ramkaran Verma vs the State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. and Another

Surendra Pratap Singh @ Surendra Yadav (as Per Fir) vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another

Firm-Ashok Kumar Gupta and Sons (Huf) and Another vs State of U.P. and Another