Ram Autar vs State Of U.P.
2019 Latest Caselaw 5563 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
 
 

?Court No. - 13
 

 
Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 1943 of 2018
 

 
Appellant :- Ram Autar
 
Respondent :- State Of U.P.
 
Counsel for Appellant :- Sarvesh Kumar Pandey,Kunwar Ravi Prakash,Vineetapandey
 
Counsel for Respondent :- Govt. Advocate
 

 
Hon'ble Mohd. Faiz Alam Khan,J.

(In Ref: C.M. Application No. 44822 of 2019)

Heard learned counsel for the appellant as well as Shri Ravi Singh Sisodia, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

This bail application has been moved by the appellant-applicant/Ram Autar, who is convict of Sessions Trial No. 492/2012, arising out of Case Crime No. 183/2011, under Sections 304/34, 308/34, 323/34, 324/34, 504, 506 I.P.C., P.S, Laharpur, District Sitapur and sentenced for maximum term of 10 years rigorous imprisonment with fine stipulation, vide judgment and order dated 07.09.2018 passed by learned Additional Session Judge, VIth, Sitapur praying to release him on bail, during pendency of instant appeal.

Learned counsel for the appellant while pressing the appeal submits that, the appellant has been falsely implicated in this case. Nothing as claimed by the prosecution has been committed by the appellant.

It is further submitted that, the trial Court has convicted the appellants as well as other co-appellants with the help of Section 34 of the I.P.C. and the other two co-appellants namely Dalla @ Dilip and Ghanshyam have been granted bail by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court, vide order dated 15.03.2019 passed in C.M. Application No. 117922 of 2018 in Criminal Appeal No. 1944 of 2018.

It is further submitted that, the death of the deceased has occurred after 06 days from his discharge from the hospital and the same could not be attributed to the injury alleged to have been caused by the appellant or co-appellants.

It is further submitted that, the appellant was on bail during the course of trial and there is no instance of misusing the liberty granted to him by the Court. Appellant is not having any previous criminal history and the manner, in which the fight is stated to have occurred was in a spur of moment and the crime is not alleged to have been caused by hatching a conspiracy or by pre-meditation.

It is further submitted that, the appellant is languishing in jail in this matter since 05.09.2018. There is no likelihood that the appellant-applicant after release on bail may flee from the process of law or will misuse the liberty of bail granted by this Court.

Learned A.G.A. opposes the prayer for bail, but could not confront the factual submissions made by the learned counsel for the appellant-applicant.

Considering the facts and circumstance of the case, without commenting upon merits, I am of the view that the learned court below has failed to appreciate the material available on record. In view of above, the order passed by the court below is liable to be set aside.

Let the appellant-applicant/Ram Autar involved in aforesaid case be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond with two sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions:-

(i) Fine imposed by the trial Court shall be deposited within 30 days from today.

(ii) The appellant shall cooperate in the early disposal of appeal without seeking unnecessary adjournment.

(iii) The appellant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail.

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.

Order Date :- 8.7.2019

Praveen