Allahabad High Court
Hari Singh vs State Of U.P. on 17 May, 2018
Bench: Shashi Kant Gupta, Bachchoo Lal
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 32
Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 959 of 2017
Appellant :- Hari Singh
Respondent :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Appellant :- Deepak Kumar Srivastava
Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
Hon'ble Shashi Kant Gupta,J.
Hon'ble Bachchoo Lal,J.
Ref: Cr. Misc. Bail Application No. 64644 of 2017.
Rejoinder affidavit filed on behalf of appellant is taken on record.
Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned AGA for the State on the bail prayer of the appellant who has been convicted in Sessions Trail No. 552 of 2013 in Case Crime No. 135 of 2013, under Sections 302, 336 I.P.C. and in Sessions Trial No. 553 of 2013 in Case Crime No. 137 of 2013, under Section 25 Arms Act and sentenced him to undergo imprisonment for life and fine has also been imposed.
Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. According to the F.I.R. version, the accused Hari Singh and Shiv Mangal Yadav fired at the deceased with country made pistols of 315 bore which hit the deceased. The deceased sustained four injuries i.e. (1) Fire arm wound of entry size 3 cm x 2.5 cm x chest cavity deep as front of Lt. side chest 4 cm below nipple at 6 'O' clock position margins inverted no blacking & tattooing, (2) Fire arm wound of exit size 2.5 cm x 2.0 cm x through and through connected to injury no. 1 over Lt back of abdomen 9 cm above sacroiliac joint margin inverted direction farward to backward and down ward, (3) Fire arm wound size 10 cm x 5 cm x 6 cm deep on medial aspect of Rt. side hand, wrist lower & lower part of fore arm blackish abrasion colour present at hand side (4) Contusion size 3 cm x 2 cm on front of mid chest 8 cm above apigestriam. Learned counsel for the appellant further submitted that appellant Hari Singh and co-accused Shiv Mangal were assigned the role of firing on the deceased but it is not specified as to who caused fire arm injury to the deceased on his chest. It has further been submitted that according to the Ballistic Examination Report the empty cartridge recovered from the spot was not found to be fired with the pistol allegedly recovered from the possession of the appellant Hari Singh. The medical evidence also does not support the prosecution version. It has further been submitted that the said incident was occurred all of a sudden over the beating of a dog of the appellant, as such the offence was allegedly caused without premeditation upon a quarrel in the heat of passion. It has further been submitted that the co-accused Shiv Mangal has been declared juvenile and the other two co-accused namely, Vishram and Sunil @ Guddu who were assigned the role of pelting stone upon the deceased have been released on bail by this Court vide order dated 14.2.2017 in Cr. Appeal No. 378 of 2017. It has further submitted that there is no criminal history against the appellant and there is no likelihood of early hearing of the appeal in near future. The appellant is in jail since 15.6.2013.
Per contra, learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail and argued that the specific role of causing fire arm injury to deceased has been assigned to the appellant. The case of appellant is distinguishable from the case of other co-accused namely, Vishram Singh and Sunil @ Guddu who have been granted bail.
Having given my thoughtful consideration to the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, we are of the opinion that the appellant has made out a case for bail.
Let the appellant Hari Singh convicted and sentenced in Sessions Trail No. 552 of 2013 in Case Crime No. 135 of 2013, under Sections 302, 336 I.P.C. and in Sessions Trial No. 553 of 2013 in Case Crime No. 137 of 2013, under Section 25 Arms Act Police Station Kalan District Shahjahanpur be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned.The photocopies of the bonds so furnished be transmitted to this Court to be kept on record of the appeal.
The bail application is allowed.
Office is directed to prepare paper books and list this appeal for hearing in due course.
Order Date :- 17.5.2018/Gss
