Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad
  4. /
  5. 2021
  6. /
  7. January

Sacchida Nand Pandey vs State Of U P

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad|20 May, 2021
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

Court No. - 6
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 20421 of 2021 Applicant :- Sacchida Nand Pandey Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Ali Hasan,Istiyaq Ali Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Ajay Bhanot,J.
Heard Sri Istiyaq Ali, learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A for the State through video conferencing mode.
A first information report was lodged against the applicant as Case Crime No.188 of 2000 at Police Station- Suriyawan District- Sant Ravi Das Bhadohi on 08.11.2000 under Sections 467, 468, 471, 420, 409 IPC.
The bail application of the applicant was rejected by learned Sessions Judge, Bhadohi at Gyanpur on 17.04.2021.
The applicant is in jail since 08.04.2021, pursuant to the said F.I.R.
Sri Istiyaq Ali, learned counsel for applicant contends that the applicant has falsely been implicated in the present case. The alleged embezzlement pertains to the year 1995-1996 and 1996- 1997. The applicant had superannuated from service as Secretary Kisan Sewa Sakhari Samiti Limited Nagmalpur Block Suryawan district Sant Ravi Das Nagar Bhadohi in the year 2017. Certain amount have already been recovered from the applicant in pursuance of the departmental enquiry. The applicant does not have any criminal history apart from this case. Lastly, it is submitted by Sri Istiyaq Ali, learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant shall not abscond, and will fully cooperate in the criminal law proceedings. The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence nor influence the witnesses in any manner.
Learned A.G.A could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions from the record.
Courts have taken notice of the overcrowding of jails during the current pandemic situation (Ref.: Suo Motu Writ Petition (c) No. 1/2020, Contagion of COVID 19 Virus in prisons before the Supreme Court of India). These circumstances shall also be factored in while considering bail applications on behalf of accused persons.
I see merit in the submissions of the learned counsel for the applicant and accordingly hold that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail.
In the light of the preceding discussion and without making any observations on the merits of the case, the bail application is allowed.
Let the applicant Sacchida Nand Pandey be released on bail in Case Crime No.188 of 2000 at Police Station- Suriyawan District- Bhadohi under Sections 467, 468, 471, 420, 409 IPC on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court below. The following conditions be imposed in the interest of justice:-
(i) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either through his counsel or personally as and when directed by the learned trial court. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him in accordance with law.
(ii) 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. If in the opinion of the trial court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.
(iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial, the trial in order to secure his presence may issue a proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. In case the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.
(iv) The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad.
(v) The computer generated copy of such order shall be self attested by the counsel of the party concerned.
(vi) The concerned Court/Authority/Official shall verify the authenticity of such computerized copy of the order from the official website of High Court Allahabad and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing.
Order Date :- 20.5.2021 Nadeem Ahmad Digitally signed by Justice Ajay Bhanot Date: 2021.05.23 15:51:26 IST Reason: Document Owner Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

Sacchida Nand Pandey vs State Of U P

Court

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad

JudgmentDate
20 May, 2021
Judges
  • Ajay Bhanot
Advocates
  • Ali Hasan Istiyaq Ali