Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2015 DIGILAW 1610 (ALL)

Chintamani Pandey v. State of U. P.

2015-06-24

MUKHTAR AHMAD

body2015
JUDGMENT Mukhtar Ahmad, J. Shri Upendra Upadhyay, Advocate counsel for accused-applicant has filed free copy of bail rejection order along with supplementary affidavit which has been placed on record. 2. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. 3. It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant -accused is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the case due to political enmity and Investigating Officer has submitted his final report after looking into the case, mentioning therein that no case is made out against the accused applicant. But, on Protest Petition filed against accused-applicant, he was ordered to be summoned. It is also submitted that as per the order of this Court accused-applicant was released on interim bail vide order dated 31.3.2015, but subsequently his bail application has been rejected. Learned counsel for the applicant vehemently argued that no case is made out against the accused-applicant and no offence under Sections 408 and 420 I.P.C. has been committed by the accused-applicant. He further submits that there are no chances of applicant's fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the prosecution evidence, and is in jail since 9.6.2015. 4. Learned A.G.A. has opposed prayer for bail. Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, severity of punishment and submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, I have gone through consideration to the applicant, the rival submission made on behalf of the parties. It is said that accused-applicant has mis-appropriated the amount of Rs.528/- in the Mid -Day Meal Scheme. Considering all the facts and circumstances of the case, but without expressing any opinion on merit, I am of the view that it is a fit case for bail. Hence bail application of the applicant is allowed. 5. Let the applicant Smt. Chintamani Pandey involved in Case Crime No. 63 of 2008, under Sections 408 and 420 I.P.C., P.S. Sakaldeeha, District Chandauli be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions; (i) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial. (ii) The applicant will not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witness. (iii) The applicant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed. 6. (ii) The applicant will not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witness. (iii) The applicant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed. 6. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the court below shall be at liberty to cancel the bail.