Raj Kumar & Others vs State Of U.P.
2013 Latest Caselaw 1776 ALL

Citation : 2013 Latest Caselaw 1776 ALL
Judgement Date : 7 May, 2013

Allahabad High Court

Raj Kumar & Others vs State Of U.P. on 7 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. - 4424 of 2007
 

 
Petitioner :- Raj Kumar & Others
 
Respondent :- State Of U.P.
 
Petitioner Counsel :- Sunil Kumar,A.K.S.Solanki,Anil Srivastava,Anubhav Trivedi,J.S.Senger,N.K.S. Solanki,R.C.Srivastava,R.D.Dauholia,Sanjay Srivastava,Sunil Kumar Singh
 
Respondent Counsel :- Govt. Advocate,A.K. Srivastava,Gaurav Kakkar,P.K.Srivastava
 

 
Hon'ble Vinod Prasad,J.

Hon'ble Anjani Kumar Mishra,J.

Heard Sri A.K. Solanki learned Advocate for the appellant and Sri P.K. Singh learned counsel for the informant and learned AGA for the State.

Sri Solanki has preferred not to press the bail prayer of appellant No. 2 Rajendra. The bail prayer of Rajendra, therefore, is stands dismissed.

It was urged that according to the prosecution allegation, the two deceased were also shot at by the rifle and the pistol but autopsy report does not indicate any fire-arm injuries on their persons and all the injuries sustained by the two deceased where by sharp weapon (farsa). Learned counsel, therefore, urged that none of the prosecution witnesses were present on the spot and the ocular testimony is contrary to the medical evidence. 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 counsel for the informant as well as learned AGA did not dispute the aforesaid factual aspects.

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 appellant Raj Kumar be enlarged on bail on him 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. 80 of 1996, under sections 148, 302/149 and 307/149 I.P.C., P.S. Jhangirpur, District Bulandshahr.

As soon as personal and surety bonds is 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 appellant is allowed one month time to deposit entire amount of fine awarded to him.

Order Date :- 7.5.2013

Priyanka