Allahabad High Court
Satish Chandra @ Satish Kumar ... vs State Of U.P. on 12 October, 2015
Bench: Ramesh Sinha
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 36
Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 5462 of 2013
Appellant :- Satish Chandra @ Satish Kumar Shukla
Respondent :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Appellant :- Jitendra Singh
Counsel for Respondent :- Govt. Advocate
Hon'ble Ramesh Sinha,J.
Heard Sri Jitendra Singh, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Vikash Rana, learned AGA appearing for the State and perused the record.
This criminal appeal has been filed by the appellant with prayer for execution of sentence and operation of the impugned judgement and order may be stayed and release the appellant on bail in S.T. No. 530 of 2009, convicting the appellants under Sections 498-A, 304-B IPC and 3/4 D.P. Act, vide judgement and order dated 25.10.2013, passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Court No.2, Fatehpur, arising out from Case Crime No. 218 of 2009, Police Station Malwan District, Fatehpur.
It has been argued by the learned counsel for the appellant that the deceased(Nisha Devi) was having bath in the bathroom and the finger of the deceased was touched in an immersion rod which spread electric current, and on account of which she succumbed some electric current and she fell down in the bathroom and received head injury in her person and on account of which she died. The appellant immediately reached with her and his family members by a Bolero vehicle at a hospital, but she could not saved her and the doctors of the said hospital has declared her dead. He further submits that after her death the appellant immediately informed her parents who have arrived there, and after two days of the incident the present FIR has been lodged by the parents of the deceased against the applicant and his family members.
He further submits that the trial court had not dealt with the said circumstances and has convicted the appellant for maximum sentence for 10 years R.I., and out of which he has already served out more than half of the sentence i.e. six years. The trial court has misread the evidence on record and convicted the appellant. The appeal is not likely to be heard in near future, hence unless the bail is granted, the appeal is likely to become infructuous. After conviction the appellant is in jail since 26.10.2009.
Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail.
Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and considering the facts and circumstances of the case as well as the sentence awarded to the appellant, I am of the opinion that the appellant is entitled to be released on bail.
Let the appellant Satish Chandra @ Satish Kumar Shukla, convicted and sentenced in the aforesaid case be released on bail on their furnishing personal bonds with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned.
The fine awarded to the appellant shall be deposited.
On acceptance of bail bonds and personal bonds, the lower court shall transmit Photostate copies thereof to this Court for being kept on record.
Order Date :- 12.10.2015/VKG
