Allahabad High Court
Rakesh And Others vs State Of U.P. on 6 May, 2013
Bench: Vinod Prasad, Anjani Kumar Mishra
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 42
Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL U/S 374 CR.P.C. No. - 7185 of 2007
Petitioner :- Rakesh And Others
Respondent :- State Of U.P.
Petitioner Counsel :- K.K. Arora,A.K.Sharma,Anil Raghav,R.K.Sharma,R.N.Sharma,R.P.Dwivedi,Rajul Bhargava,S.P.S.Raghav
Respondent Counsel :- Govt. Advocate,Ajay Kumar Pandey,Satish Trivedi
CONNECTED WITH
Criminal Appeal No.6709 of 2007
Criminal Appeal No. 5934 of 2007
Criminal Appeal No. 6126 of 2007
Criminal Appeal No. 7185 of 2007
&
Criminal Appeal No. 6419 of 2007
Hon'ble Vinod Prasad,J.
Hon'ble Anjani Kumar Mishra,J.
We have heard Sri Sanjay Kumar Singh learned Advocate and learned AGA as well as Sri Ajay Kumar Pandey counsel for the informant holding brief of Sri Satish Dubey learned Senior Advocate.
From the perusal of the record, we find that in respect of appellant No. 3 Vijay, who claimed juvenility, there is a report that on the date of the incident appellant Vijay was 15 years ten months and 25 days of age. Thus on the day on which the incident occurred said appellant Vijay was a juvenile. This observation has been made by our predecessor Bench also on 31.1.2012 when it had reserved the order.
Since Vijay is a juvenile under Juvenile Justice Act, he now cannot be incarcerated into jail any more.
In view of the aforesaid fact, which has not been disputed either by AGA or the informant counsel, we consider it appropriate to release the appellant Vijay on bail, on his mother Maya Devi executing a personal bond of two lakhs to the satisfaction of the trial judge concerned with two solvent sureties of her relatives in the like amount.
We have heard Sri Rahul Bhargava learned Advocate for appellants, namely, Rakesh and Kaladhar in Criminal Appeal No. 6126 of 2007.
It has been contended by the learned counsel that it was a case of free fight and it is not clear as to which side was the aggressor. It has been further submitted that the said appellants are not alleged to have caused any injury to the deceased and that they were armed with country made pistols.
This fact has not been disputed by learned AGA.
We have also heard Mr. Rajeev Gupta in support of bail prayer of Satya Prakash son of Chottey Lal in Criminal Appeal No. 6709 of 2007.
He has submitted that his case is similar to that of appellants, namely, Kaladhar and Rakesh aforementioned. He is alleged to have fired at Ram Das with his licensed gun. Learned counsel further submits that Satya Prakash does not possess a fire-arm licence. He has not caused any injury to the deceased.
Learned AGA has submitted that Satya Prakash fired at Ram Das who sustained five firearm wounds of entry which are flesh deep on his neck, chest and forearm.
Looking to the above argument and period of detention and the fact that the appeal is not likely to be heard in near future, we consider it appropriate to release the appellants on bail.
Let the appellants, namely, Rakesh, Kaladhar and Satya Prakash son of Chottey Lal be 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. No. 2 of 1996, under sections 147, 148, 149, 302, 307, 324 I.P.C., P.S. Iradat Nagar, District Agra.
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.
Order Date :- 6.5.2013
Priyanka
