Yogesh vs State Of U.P.
2013 Latest Caselaw 1077 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 

?Court No. - 42
 

 
Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL U/S 374 CR.P.C. No. - 848 of 2012
 
Petitioner :- Yogesh
 
Respondent :- State Of U.P.
 
Petitioner Counsel :- Dharmendra Singhal,Vinod Kumar Agarwal
 
Respondent Counsel :- Govt. Advocate
 

 
Hon'ble Vinod Prasad,J.

Hon'ble Anjani Kumar Mishra,J.

Heard Sri Dharmendra Singhal learned Advocate in support of bail prayer of Yogesh in Criminal Appeal No. 848 of 2012 and learned AGA for the State.

It is urged that appellant, Yogesh is not named in the FIR and the victim who was eight years  old and a student of class IIIrd returned safely but only after Rs. five lacs was paid as ransom. It is further submitted that during the trial Yogesh never got identified. There was no formal identification parode conducted as is required under Section 10 of the Evidence Act. It is therefore, urged that there is no reliable evidence so far as Yogesh is concerned. In support of the said submission, page 6 of the impugned judgment was referred to. It is further submitted that the appellant was on bail during trial which liberty he had not misused and chances of appeal being heard in near future is extremely remote.

Learned AGA could not disputed that victim had not identified appellant, Yogesh in Court because on the day on which his deposition was recorded, Yogesh was absent. No effort was made by the prosecution to get appellant Yogesh identified by the victim.

Without expressing any opinion on the merits but looking to facts and circumstances, we find that the case of appellant Yogesh is distinguishable from other three other appellants, namely, Deepak, Mohd Umar and Mustafa who were duly identified during the proceedings in Court. Against them, there is credible evidence on record.

Let appellant, Yogesh be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond of rupees one lakh and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of trial Judge concerned in S.T. No. 442 of 2009, under sections 364-A, 368/34 I.P.C., P.S. Sahibabad, District Ghaziabad.

As soon as personal and surety bonds are furnished, photocopies of the same are directed to be transmitted to this Court forthwith by trial Judge concerned to be kept on the record of this appeal.

The appellants are allowed one month time to deposit entire amount of fine awarded to them

This order shall not be treated to be parity so far as other three accused are concerned as against them, as observed earlier, there is sufficient evidence.

Order Date :- 18.4.2013

Priyanka