Allahabad High Court
PANKAJ KUMAR MISHRAversusSTATE OF U.P.
- Decided
- Bench
- VANI RANJAN AGRAWAL
Holding
The court held that the case warranted suspension of the sentence and grant of bail under Section 430(2) of the B.N.S.S., without expressing any opinion on the merits of the appeal.
Summary
The applicant, Pankak Kumar Mishra, filed an application under Section 430(2) of the B.N.S.S. seeking suspension of his sentence and bail while a criminal appeal (No.125 of 2025) is pending before the Sessions Judge, Bareilly. He contended that he is innocent, the conviction is against the weight of evidence, and he has already served over three years of a longer sentence, with no prospect of an early hearing. The State opposed bail, emphasizing the seriousness of the offences (IPC sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 506) and the applicant’s criminal history. The High Court, after considering the submissions and the pending appeal, decided not to opine on the merits but found the circumstances suitable for granting bail and suspending the sentence. Accordingly, the application was allowed, the sentence was suspended, and the applicant was released on bail subject to strict conditions.
Issues considered
- Whether the sentence of a convicted person can be suspended under Section 430(2) of the B.N.S.S. pending a criminal appeal.
- Whether bail can be granted to an appellant convicted of serious IPC offences despite a criminal history.
- Whether the applicant’s right to liberty outweighs the nature and severity of the alleged offences.
Legislation cited
- B.N.S.S. — s. 430(2)
- Indian Penal Code — s. 420, 467, 468, 471, 506
Subjects
- bail
- suspension of sentence
- Section 430(2)
- pending appeal
- Indian Penal Code
- criminal law
- high court
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. APPLICATION U/S 430(2) BNSS No. -
11 of 2025
Pankaj Kumar Mishra
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P.
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Pankaj Sharma, Prakash
Sharma
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 93
HON'BLE MRS. VANI RANJAN AGRAWAL, J.
1. This application under Section 430(2) of B.N.S.S. has been
preferred by the applicant for suspension of sentence of the
applicant in pending appeal No.125 of 2025 (Pankaj Kumar
Mishra Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh) before the court of learned
Sessions Judge, Bareilly, arising out of Criminal Case No.1139 of
2023, arising out of Case Crime No.63 of 2021, under Sections
420, 467, 468, 471, 506 I.P.C., Police Station- Izzat Nagar,
District- Bareilly and release the applicant on bail in Case Crime
No. 63 of 2021, under Section 420, 467, 468, 471, 506 I.P.C.,
Police Station- Izzat Nagar, District- Bareilly.
2. Heard Sri Abhishek Mishra, Advocate, holding brief of Sri
Pankaj Sharma, learned counsel for the applicant as well as the
learned AGA for the State.
3. It has been submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that
the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated. It has
been further submitted that the conviction and sentence imposed
by the learned trial court is against the weight of evidence on
record. The trial court has misread the evidence on record and
convicted the applicant. Learned counsel for the applicant further
submits that the bail application of the applicant was rejected by
appellate Court on 27.10.2025. The applicant has criminal history
of 20 cases, which has been explained in present application. It is
NA430 No. 11 of 2025
2
further submitted that the applicant has already undergone more
than 3 years of incarceration out of the total sentence awarded.
The appeal has already been preferred before the court below,
which is not likely to be heard in near future. The applicant is in
jail since 08.11.2022 and if the applicant is released on bail, he
will not misuse the liberty of bail. Since there is no likelihood of
early hearing of the appeal in near future, the applicant may be
released on bail.
4. Per contra, learned A.G.A. for the State opposed the prayer for
bail and submitted that the bail application/suspension of
sentence has rightly been rejected by the appellate Court, looking
to the severity and nature of offence.
5. I have considered the rival submissions made by learned
counsel for the parties and have gone through the entire record
including the impugned judgment.
6. Considering the submissions of learned counsel for the parties,
nature of accusation, period of incarceration and the fact that the
appeal is pending before the court, and without expressing any
opinion on the merits of the case, this Court finds it a fit case for
grant of bail and suspension of sentence.
7. Accordingly, application filed under Section 430(2) B.N.S.S. is
allowed.
8. Let the sentence of the applicant be suspended during
pendency of criminal appeal before the trial court in exercise of
powers under Section 430(2) of B.N.S.S.
9. Let the above named accused-applicant Pankaj Kumar
Mishra be released on bail in the aforesaid case on his
furnishing a personal bond and two sureties in like amount to the
satisfaction of the court concerned subject to the following
conditions :-
(i) The applicant shall not misuse the liberty of bail.
(ii) The applicant shall cooperate in early disposal of the appeal
pending before the appellate court.
NA430 No. 11 of 2025
3
(iii) The applicant shall appear before the appellate court on each
date fixed unless exempted.
(iv) The applicant shall not tamper with prosecution evidence.
(v) In case of breach of any condition, it shall be open to the court
below to cancel the bail of applicant.
April 10, 2026
P. Pandey
(Mrs. Vani Ranjan Agrawal,J.)
Digitally signed by :-
PUSHPENDRA PANDEY
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…