Allahabad High Court
Rupesh & Others vs State Of U.P. on 16 May, 2013
Bench: Vinod Prasad, Anjani Kumar Mishra
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 42
Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL DEFECTIVE U/S 374 CR.P.C. No. - 82 of 2010
Petitioner :- Rupesh & Others
Respondent :- State Of U.P.
Petitioner Counsel :- Shamsher Singh,Mithilesh Kumar Tiwari
Respondent Counsel :- Govt. Advocate
IN CONNECTED
Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL DEFECTIVE U/S 374 CR.P.C. No. - 83 of 2010
Petitioner :- Harpal & Others
Respondent :- State Of U.P.
Petitioner Counsel :- Shamsher Singh,Mithilesh Kumar Tiwari
Respondent Counsel :- Govt. Advocate
IN CONNECTED
Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL U/S 374 CR.P.C. No. - 1016 of 2010
Petitioner :- Som Pal & Another
Respondent :- State Of U.P.
Petitioner Counsel :- Shamsher Singh,Mithilesh Kumar Tiwari
Respondent Counsel :- Govt. Advocate,Apul Mishra
Hon'ble Vinod Prasad,J.
Hon'ble Anjani Kumar Mishra,J.
We have heard Shri Mithlesh Kumar Tiwari and Shri Shamsher Singh, learned counsel for the appellants in the three connected appeals, who have been convicted and sentenced to life imprisonment under Section 302/149 I.P.C. and to 10 years R.I. under Section 307/34 I.P.C. apart from other lesser sentences and fine in S.T. No. 282 of 2007, P.S. Kotwali, District Bijnor.
Learned counsel have submitted that there are general allegations against the appellants and as per the first information report, the appellants are alleged to have assaulted the deceased and the injured with country made pistols and swords. No specific weapon has been assigned to any of them. It is further submitted that the appellant No. 1 in Criminal Appeal No. 1016 of 2010, Sompal, is dead and that Harpal Appellant No. 1 in connected Criminal Appeal (Defective) No. 83 of 2010 is aged about 90 years. Lastly it has been pointed out that appellants Harpal, Hemraj @ Hema, Ompal and Dharmapal (appellants in Criminal Appeal (Defective) No. 82 of 2010 and Criminal Appeal No. 1016 were on bail during trial and did not misuse the said privilege granted to them.
Learned AGA has submitted that country made firearms were recovered on the pointing out of the appellants Rupesh, Dinesh and Vinesh (appellants in Criminal Appeal (Defective) No. 82 of 2010) and they were charged, tried and convicted under Section 25 of the Arms Act also and they were not on bail during trial.
On a consideration of the rival submissions, perusal of the record and also looking at the period of detention and the fact that the appeals are not likely to be heard in the near future, we are of the opinion that appellants Ompal, Harpal, Dharmpal and [email protected] Hema are entitled to bail.
The bail applications of Rupesh, Dinesh and Vinesh are rejected as the fatal injury to the deceased was caused by a firearm.
Let the appellants, Om Pal, Harpal and Dharampal and Hemraj 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. 282 of 2007, under section 25 of Arms Act, P.S. Kotwali, District Bijnor.
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.
By the order dated 26.4.2010 the office had been directed to allot the regular number to both the defective appeals. The said order does not appear to have been complied with. The office is directed to comply with the order dated 26.4.2013.
Order Date :- 16.5.2013
Priyanka
