Rafal Singh & Another vs State Of U.P.
2013 Latest Caselaw 5242 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 

?Court No. - 43
 

 
Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 3585 of 2013
 

 
Appellant :- Rafal Singh & Another
 
Respondent :- State Of U.P.
 
Counsel for Appellant :- Vikas Sharma,Sanjay Singh
 
Counsel for Respondent :- Govt. Advocate
 

 
Hon'ble Naheed Ara Moonis,J.

Heard learned counsel for the appellants, learned AGA for the State and have gone through the record.

Admit.

Summon the lower court record.

It is submitted by the learned counsel for the appellants that according to the prosecution case the appellants and one Jitendra, brother of appellants armed with lathi-danda and balkati, started assaulting the complainant and his brother, who sustained serious injuries. The medical report is inconsistent with the prosecution case. No specific weapon has been assigned to the appellants for causing injuries to the injured persons. There is inconsistency in the statements of the prosecution witnesses. The sentence awarded to the appellants is too excessive. The case will not travel beyond Section 325 IPC, which is bailable offence. The appellants were on bail during trial and had never misused the liberty of bail. Now the appellants are on interim bail. There is no likelihood of early hearing of appeal in near future because there is dockets of pendency of old appeals and the purpose for filing the appeal would be frustrated, therefore the appellants may be released on bail during the pendency of appeal. In case they are enlarged on bail, they will not misuse the liberty of bail.

Per contra the learned AGA has opposed the prayer for bail.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and keeping in the view of the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, let the appellants, namely, Rafal Singh and Narendra Singh, convicted and sentenced in Session Trial No.260 of 2011, State Vs. Rafal Singh & another, arising out of case crime no.991 of 2010, under Sections 323/34, 325/34, 308/34 IPC, P.S. Deoband, District Saharanpur, be released on bail on their furnishing a personal bond each with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned. The photocopies of the bonds so furnished be transmitted to this Court to be kept on record of the appeal.

It is made clear that the realization of fine is not stayed.

After receipt of the record the office is directed to prepare the paper books and list the appeal for hearing in due course.

Order Date :- 29.8.2013

Mustaqeem.