Are you looking for a legal research tool ?
Get Started
Do check other products like LIBIL, a legal due diligence tool to get a litigation check report and Case Management tool to monitor and collaborate on cases.

Sumit Pandey v. State Of U.p

Sumit Pandey v. State Of U.p

(High Court Of Judicature At Allahabad)

CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 20210 of 2022 | 24-05-2022

Ajay Bhanot,J.

1. By means of this bail application the applicant has prayed to be enlarged on bail in Case Crime No.75 of 2022 at Police Station-Karchhana, DistrictAllahabad under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC and Sections 60/10 of the U.P. Sarvajanik Pariksha Adhinium, 1998. The applicant is in jail since 31.03.2022.

2. The bail application of the applicant was rejected by learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, Court No.21, Allahabad on 22.04.2022.

3. Shri Ramanuj Tripathi, learned counsel for the applicant contends that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the instant case. The applicant did not impersonate as a candidate. He did not facilitate use of unfair means. He was falsely framed after an argument with the authorities at the examination centre. Learned counsel for the applicant contends that the applicant does not have any criminal history apart from the instant case.

4. Shri Paritosh Kumar Malviya, learned A.G.A. could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions from the record. He, however, does not dispute the fact that the applicant does not have any criminal history apart from this case.

5. I see merit in the submissions of the learned counsel for the applicant and hold that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail.

6. In the light of the preceding discussion and without making any observations on the merits of the case, the bail application is allowed.

7. Let the applicant-Sumit Pandey be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions.

(i) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.

(ii) The applicant will not influence any witness.

(iii) The applicant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted.

(iv) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

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

Advocate List
  • Ramanuj Tripathi

  • G.A.

Bench
  • Hon'ble Justice Ajay Bhanot
Eq Citations
  • LQ
  • LQ/AllHC/2022/8214
Head Note

A. Penal Code, 1860 — Ss.419, 420, 467, 468 and 471 — U.P. Sarvajanik Pariksha Adhinium, 1998 (2 of 1999), Ss.60/10 — Impersonation and use of unfair means in examination — Applicant alleged to have impersonated as a candidate and facilitated use of unfair means — Applicant contended that he was falsely implicated — Applicant having no criminal history apart from instant case — Anticipatory bail granted to applicant —