High Court · 2025

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. 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. 226 of 2024 under Sections 109, 118(1), 352, 351(2), 351(3) BNS, Police Station- Mall District - Lucknow. The contention of learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the instant matter. He submits that in fact there was some family dispute between the parties, therefore, the quarrel took place between the family member and injuries were inflicted on the informant's side. He submits that there was no intention to commit attempt of murder and the injuries sustained were caused merely on account of the scuffle that took place between the parties. Thereafter, the parties sat together and they have decided that the matter will not be pressed by the informant and they would settle their dispute inside the family. He next submitted that if the applicant would not be released on bail, there would be animosity between the family members. He further submitted that an application has already been moved by the informant namely Bhanu Pandey to the Superintendent of Police, Lucknow to the effect that he is not interested to press this matter further. He next submits that the criminal history of the applicant has been duly explained in the bail application. Further submission is that the charge sheet has been filed thus, there is no possibility that he would tamper the evidences or would threaten the witnesses and he is languishing in jail since 20.07.2024 and he undertakes that in case, he is granted bail, he will not misuse the liberty of the same and would cooperate in the trial proceedings. Per contra, learned counsel for the complainant has submitted that in fact there was some family dispute between the parties, therefore, the quarrel took place between the family member and simple injuries were inflicted on the informant's side and there was no intention to commit attempt of murder and the injuries sustained were caused merely on account of the scuffle that took place between the parties. Thereafter, the parties sat together and they have decided that the matter will not be pressed by the informant and they would settle their dispute inside the family. He further submitted that an application has already been moved by the informant namely Bhanu Pandey to the Superintendent of Police, Lucknow to the effect that he is not interested to press this matter further. Learned A.G.A. for the State has, however, opposed the bail application on merits but he has no objection if the informant does not want to press the matter and he is ready to settle the dispute inside the family. Having heard learned counsels for the parties and after perusal of material placed on record, it transpires that in fact there was some family dispute between the parties, therefore, the quarrel took place between the family members and injuries were inflicted on the informant's side; there was no intention to commit attempt of murder as the injuries sustained were caused merely on account of the scuffle that took place between the parties; thereafter, the parties sat together and they have decided that the matter will not be pressed by the informant and they would settle their dispute inside the family; an application has already been moved by the informant namely Bhanu Pandey to the Superintendent of Police, Lucknow to the effect that he is not interested to press this matter further; the criminal history of the applicant has been duly explained in the bail application; the charge sheet has been filed, thus, there is no possibility that he would tamper the evidences or would threaten the witnesses and he is languishing in jail since 20.07.2024; prima facie, there is no cogent piece of evidence against the applicant so as to connect him with the offence coupled with the fact that the applicant has undertaken that in case, he is granted bail, he will not misuse the liberty of same and would co-operate in the trial proceedings. Considering the submissions of learned counsels for the parties, nature of accusation and severity of punishment in case of prima facie conviction, nature of supporting evidence, 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. Let the accused-applicant- Anoop Kumar Pandey 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:- (1) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/ pressurizing the witnesses, or otherwise during the investigation or trial; (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; (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 (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. 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 application and must not be construed to have any reflection on the merits of the case. Order Date :- 11.3.2025 (Manoj K.) MANOJ KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. 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. 226 of 2024 under Sections 109, 118(1), 352, 351(2), 351(3) BNS, Police Station- Mall District - Lucknow. The contention of learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the instant matter. He submits that in fact there was some family dispute between the parties, therefore, the quarrel took place between the family member and injuries were inflicted on the informant's side. He submits that there was no intention to commit attempt of murder and the injuries sustained were caused merely on account of the scuffle that took place between the parties. Thereafter, the parties sat together and they have decided that the matter will not be pressed by the informant and they would settle their dispute inside the family. He next submitted that if the applicant would not be released on bail, there would be animosity between the family members. He further submitted that an application has already been moved by the informant namely Bhanu Pandey to the Superintendent of Police, Lucknow to the effect that he is not interested to press this matter further. He next submits that the criminal history of the applicant has been duly explained in the bail application. Further submission is that the charge sheet has been filed thus, there is no possibility that he would tamper the evidences or would threaten the witnesses and he is languishing in jail since 20.07.2024 and he undertakes that in case, he is granted bail, he will not misuse the liberty of the same and would cooperate in the trial proceedings. Per contra, learned counsel for the complainant has submitted that in fact there was some family dispute between the parties, therefore, the quarrel took place between the family member and simple injuries were inflicted on the informant's side and there was no intention to commit attempt of murder and the injuries sustained were caused merely on account of the scuffle that took place between the parties. Thereafter, the parties sat together and they have decided that the matter will not be pressed by the informant and they would settle their dispute inside the family. He further submitted that an application has already been moved by the informant namely Bhanu Pandey to the Superintendent of Police, Lucknow to the effect that he is not interested to press this matter further. Learned A.G.A. for the State has, however, opposed the bail application on merits but he has no objection if the informant does not want to press the matter and he is ready to settle the dispute inside the family. Having heard learned counsels for the parties and after perusal of material placed on record, it transpires that in fact there was some family dispute between the parties, therefore, the quarrel took place between the family members and injuries were inflicted on the informant's side; there was no intention to commit attempt of murder as the injuries sustained were caused merely on account of the scuffle that took place between the parties; thereafter, the parties sat together and they have decided that the matter will not be pressed by the informant and they would settle their dispute inside the family; an application has already been moved by the informant namely Bhanu Pandey to the Superintendent of Police, Lucknow to the effect that he is not interested to press this matter further; the criminal history of the applicant has been duly explained in the bail application; the charge sheet has been filed, thus, there is no possibility that he would tamper the evidences or would threaten the witnesses and he is languishing in jail since 20.07.2024; prima facie, there is no cogent piece of evidence against the applicant so as to connect him with the offence coupled with the fact that the applicant has undertaken that in case, he is granted bail, he will not misuse the liberty of same and would co-operate in the trial proceedings. Considering the submissions of learned counsels for the parties, nature of accusation and severity of punishment in case of prima facie conviction, nature of supporting evidence, 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. Let the accused-applicant- Anoop Kumar Pandey 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:- (1) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/ pressurizing the witnesses, or otherwise during the investigation or trial; (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; (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 (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. 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 application and must not be construed to have any reflection on the merits of the case. Order Date :- 11.3.2025 (Manoj K.) MANOJ KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench