Teetu vs State Of U.P.
2016 Latest Caselaw 5290 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 

?Court No. - 49
 

 
Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 4039 of 2016
 

 
Appellant :- Teetu
 
Respondent :- State Of U.P.
 
Counsel for Appellant :- Vindeshwari Prasad,Praveen Kumar Srivastava
 
Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
 

 
Hon'ble Raghvendra Kumar,J.

Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned A.G.A.for the State of U.P.

It has been submitted on behalf of the appellant that the trial court has failed to  appreciate the evidence in right perspective and erred in recording the finding of conviction, the judgment  is thus perverse.

Admit.

Summon the lower court record within six weeks from today.

List immediately after receipt of record.

Order Date :- 19.8.2016

Su

Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 4039 of 2016

Appellant :- Teetu

Respondent :- State Of U.P.

Counsel for Appellant :- Vindeshwari Prasad,Praveen Kumar Srivastava

Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

Hon'ble Raghvendra Kumar,J.

Criminal Misc . Bail Application Application No. 251503 of 2016

Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned A.G.A.for the State of U.P.

It has been argued by learned counsel for the appellant that the prosecutrix has not taken consistent stand in her examination-in-chief and in cross examination.  In examination-in-chief and in cross examination, she has made allegation of rape by Teetu  but subsequently in cross examination she has stated that accused Teetu met with her along with accused Rajendra. It has further been submitted that in spite of lack of specific allegation, the court below has failed to appreciate the evidence in right perspective.

Learned A.G.A.has opposed the bail application.

There is no likelihood of this appeal being heard in near future 

Considering the rival submissions  and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the appeal, I find it a fit case for bail.

Let the appellant Teetu  convicted in S.T.No. 683 of 2004 ( State Vs. Teetu), arising out of case crime No. 1035 of 2004, under sections 363, 366 I.P.C., Police Station Ujhani, District Budaun  be admitted to bail subject to his executing a personal bond and furnishing two heavy and reliable sureties  in the like sum to the satisfaction of the Court concerned.

The appellant is directed to deposit 50% of the amount of fine imposed by the trial court within 10 days from the date of his release from jail and the  realisation of  rest 50%  fine shall remain stayed during pendency of the appeal.

Order Date :- 19.8.2016

Su