Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:38350 Reserved Court No. - 71 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 38954 of 2024 Applicant :- Lavkush Pandey Alias Raja Pandey Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Chandra Shekhar Mishra,Ram Bahadur,Sr. Advocate Counsel for Opposite Party :- Shashi Kant Shukla,G.A. Hon'ble Raj Beer Singh,J. 1. Heard Sri Anil Kumar Srivastava, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Sri Chandra Shekhar Mishra, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Shashi Kant Shukla, learned counsel for the informant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material brought on record. 2. The present second bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant in Case Crime No. 88 of 2018, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 302, 452, 34, 216 I.P.C. and Section 7 of Criminal Law Amendment Act, Police Station Karchhana, District Prayagraj (Allahabad) with the prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail. The first bail application of applicant was dismissed for want of prosecution by this Court vide order dated 20.02.2024. 3. It has been argued by learned Senior counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in this case. As per first information report, the role of firing at deceased has been attributed to the applicant and co-accused Vidyakant Vishwakarma. Co-accused Vidyakant Vishwakarma has already been granted bail by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 02.08.2023. There is undue delay in lodging of the first information report. It was stated that the statements of material witnesses have already been recorded before the Trial Court and thus, now there is no possibility of tampering with the evidence. There are contradictions in the statements of witnesses recorded before the Trial Court and that independent witnesses have not supported prosecution version. The criminal history of 29 cases has been shown against the applicant but the same has duly been explained. Learned Senior Counsel submitted that the applicant is in jail since 04.04.2018 and thus, he has already undergone the detention of about seven years. Referring to the case of Balwinder Singh Vs. State of Punjab & Another (SLP No. 8523 of 2024) decided on 09.09.2024, it was submitted that applicant is entitled for bail. 4. On the other hand, learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for the informant have opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that in the first information report, role of firing has been assigned to applicant and co-accused Vidyakant Vishwakarma. There are serious allegations against applicant. Learned counsel for the informant submitted that during the trial, statement of six witnesses have been recorded before the Trial Court. After this case, the informant was got murdered by applicant by hatching a conspiracy. There is long criminal history of 29 cases against applicant and one of the case relates to murder of an Incharge of Police Station. It was submitted that in view of the aforesaid facts and criminal history, the applicant can not be granted bail merely on the ground that co-accused Vidyakant Vishwakarma has been granted bail. 5. I have considered the rival submissions and perused the record. 6. Perusal of the record shows that in the first information report role of firing at the deceased has been attributed to applicant and co-accused Vidyakant Vishwakaram. Though, it appears that indiscriminate firing was made upon the deceased but co-accused Vidyakant Vishwakarma has already been granted bail by a co- ordinate Bench of this Court. The applicant is in jail since 04.04.2018 and thus, applicant has already undergone detention of about seven years. Material witnesses have already been examined but it appears that a number of formal witnesses are yet to be examined and thus, trial of the case is likely to take sufficient long time. Long criminal history of 29 cases has been shown against the applicant but considering the fact that similarly placed co-accused has been granted bail, applicant is in jail since 04.04.2018 and that material witnesses have already been examined, it would not be just and proper to reject the bail application of applicant merely on the ground of criminal history of applicant. Considering all the aforesaid facts, a case for bail is made out. Hence, the present second bail application is hereby allowed. 7. Let the applicant – Lavkush Pandey @ Raja Pandey involved in the aforesaid crime be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two local sureties of heavy amount each of the like amount to the satisfaction of court concerned subject to the following conditions: i. The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during trial. ii. The applicant will not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witnesses. iii. The applicant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted. The applicant shall co-operate for early disposal of the case. iv. The applicant shall not commit any offence similar to the offence of which he is accused, or suspected, of the commission of which he is suspected. v. The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence. 8. In case of breach of any of the above condition, the Trial Court shall be at liberty to cancel the bail of applicant in accordance with law. Order Date :- 18.3.2025 SK Srivastava Digitally signed by :- SAILESH KUMAR SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad Digitally signed by :- SAILESH KUMAR SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad