Allahabad High Court
Rahees vs State Of U.P. on 4 July, 2013
Bench: Vinod Prasad, Anjani Kumar Mishra
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 42
Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 6248 of 2010
Appellant :- Rahees
Respondent :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Appellant :- Manoj Kumar,Brijendra Kumar Ojha,Govind Saran Hajela
Counsel for Respondent :- Govt. Advocate
CONNECTED WITH
Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 6380 of 2010
Appellant :- Devendra
Respondent :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Appellant :- Radhey Shyam Shukla
Counsel for Respondent :- Govt. Advocate
CONNECTED WITH
Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 6139 of 2010
Appellant :- Sripal
Respondent :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Appellant :- Apul Misra,P.N. Misra,Rajeev Kumar Singh Parmar
Counsel for Respondent :- Govt. Advocate
Hon'ble Vinod Prasad,J.
Hon'ble Anjani Kumar Mishra,J.
Heard Sri G.S. Hajela, learned counsel for the appellant Rahees in Criminal Appeal No. 6248 of 2010, Sri Radhey Shyam Shukla, learned counsel for the appellant Devendra in Criminal Appeal No. 6380 of 2010 and Sri P.N. Mishra, learned Senior Advocate for Sripal in Criminal Appeal No. 6139 of 2010 and learned AGA for the State.
Counter affidavit filed by learned AGA in Criminal Appeal No. 6139 of 2010 Sripal vs. State of U.P. is taken on record.
As prayed by Sri P.N. Mishra, learned Senior Advocate, he is allowed a week's time to file rejoinder affidavit.
Referring to the various statements of witnesses as has been referred to in the impugned judgment specifically page Nos. 55, 56 and 58 along with other pages, it is submitted by both the counsel for the appellants Rahees and Devendra that they were named in the FIR on the discloser statements of witnesses but in fact no identification was got done. Informant had scribed their name in the FIR on the discloser statements of the witnesses and he himself had not seen them during the incident nor any identification test was conducted. PW-1 went to the extent of saying that he could not identify the culprits even in Court when questioned about the same. Appellant Rahees was on bail during trial and it is a case of no evidence so far as he is concerned. For appellant Devendra Submitted Sri Radhey Shyam Shukla, learned Advocate that he was not on bail but the testimony of the witnesses does not necessarily and conclusively establish his guilt. It is further submitted that both these two appellants do not have any criminal history. Appellant Rahees has not misused the liberty of bail and chance of appeal being heard near future is extremely remote.
Learned AGA did not dispute the referred statement of the witnesses regarding fixing of the identity of the appellants.
Without adverting over merits of the matter but looking to the above arguments and the fact of appeal is not likely to be decided in near future we consider it appropriate to release both the appellants Rahees and Devendra on bail.
Let the appellants, namely, Rahees and Devendra enlarged on bail on their 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. Nos. 1065 of 2003 and 234 of 2007, under sections 147, 148, 302/149 and 307/149 I.P.C., P.S. Jalalabad, District Shahjahanpur.
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.
List again on 11.07.2013 for bail prayer of appellant Sripal.
Order Date :- 4.7.2013
Priyanka
