CHANDRA PRAKASH PANDEY v. STATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER
BAILC/267/2023 · 2025-07-31
Krishan Pahal
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 27594 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 27594 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:129349 Court No. - 65 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL CANCELLATION APPLICATION No. - 267 of 2023 Applicant :- Chandra Prakash Pandey Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Durga Charan Singh Yadav,Vaishno Poojan Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Suraj Kumar Singh Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.
1. List has been revised.
2. Heard Sri Arpit Narayan Dwivedi, Advocate holding brief of Sri Dharnidhar Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Somesh Khare, learned counsel for opposite party no.2, Sri Sunil Kumar, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material placed on record.
3. The present bail cancellation application has been filed for cancelling the bail granted to opposite party no.2 by Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 6.11.2019 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.46933 of 2019 (Ajay Kumar Singh vs. State of U.P.) in Case Crime No.569 of 2019, under Sections 306, 420 and 506 I.P.C., Police Station Sigra, District Varanasi.
4. Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that opposite party no.2 is a powerful person of the locality and brands clout in the area and some unknown persons had threatened the applicant to settle the matter, as such, the bail granted to opposite party no.2 vide order dated 6.11.2019 is liable to be set-aside.
5. Per contra, learned counsel for opposite party no.2 has opposed the bail application on the ground that the said allegations are vague. Even the identity of the persons who had threatened the applicant has not been established. There is no FIR at the police station. It is an effort of the applicant to send opposite party no.2 behind bars.
6. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and taking into
consideration the fact that there is no other cogent grounds to set- aside the bail granted to opposite party no.2, I do not find it a fit
case for setting-aside the impugned order dated 06.11.2019.
7. The present bail cancellation application is hereby found devoid of merits and is accordingly rejected.
Order Date :- 1.8.2025 (Ravi Kant) (Justice Krishan Pahal) Digitally signed by :- RAVI KANT High Court of Judicature at Allahabad