Allahabad High Court
Daya Ram vs State Of U.P. on 9 May, 2019
Bench: Pradeep Kumar Srivastava
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 80
Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 6041 of 2018
Appellant :- Daya Ram
Respondent :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Appellant :- Sushil Kumar
Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Sushil Kumar Dubey
Hon'ble Pradeep Kumar Srivastava,J.
Supplementary affidavit filed by Sri B.K. Shukla, learned counsel for the appellant is taken on record.
Heard Sri B.K. Shukla, learned counsel for the accused-appellant and learned A.G.A. for the State on bail application. Perused the record.
By the judgement and order dated 28.9.2018 passed by learned Additional District & Sessions Judge, Court No. 4, Jalaun at Orai, the accused-appellant has been convicted in S.T. No. 05 of 2015, arising out of Case Crime No.520 of 2014, P.S. Gohan, District Jalaun and sentenced for the offence under section 306 IPC, for four years rigorous imprisonment and fine of Rs.10,000/- and in case of default in payment of fine, further three months simple imprisonment.
From perusal of prosecution version, it is clear that on 15.9.2014, the incident took place in which, it was Veer Singh who had beaten the deceased by Chappal.
Submission of learned counsel for the accused-appellants is that accused-appellant has been falsely implicated in this case. Further submission is that co-accused Veer Singh has already been released on bail by this Court on 28.3.2019 in Criminal Appeal No. 282 of 2019. There was no role of accused-appellant in the alleged incident. Further submission is that accused-appellant is suffering from cancer and he requires treatment as is evident from the averments made in the supplementary affidavit filed today. Further submission is that accused-appellant was on bail during trial and he never misused the liberty of bail. Accused-appellant is in jail since 28.9.2018. He undertakes that he will not misuse the liberty of bail, if granted.
Learned A.G.A. as well as Sri Sushil Kumar Dubey, appearing for the complainant have vehemently opposed the prayer of bail and submitted that learned trial court has rightly convicted and sentenced the accused appellant after appreciating evidence on record. However, they have not disputed that co-accused Veer Singh has been released on bail.
Learned counsel for the complainant submitted that in the whole incident accused-appellant was with Veer Singh and in the FIR it has come that father of the informant said to him in the night that incident has been caused against him with the plan prepared by accused-appellant Daya Ram. This argument has also been advanced that deceased was retired from CRPF and for his contribution, he was given President Award.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the fact that accused-appellant is suffering from cancer and is admitted in J.K. Cancer Institute, Kanpur as is evident from supplementary affidavit filed today, co-accused Veer Singh has already been released on bail and also that there is no chance of early hearing of this appeal, without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, I find it to be a case for bail during pendency of appeal.
Let the appellant-Daya Ram convicted in Sessions Trial No. 05 of 2015, arising out of Case Crime No. 520 of 2014, under Section 306 IPC, P.S. Gohan, District Jalaun, be released on bail during pendency of appeal on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned.
So far as sentence of fine is concerned, on depositing 50% of fine, the remaining fine shall remain stayed during pendency of appeal. 50% fine shall be deposited within a month from receipt of this order.
As soon as personal bond and sureties are furnished, after keeping photostat copies of the same, original copies are directed to be transmitted to this Court forthwith from the trial court.
List the appeal for hearing in due course.
Order Date :- 9.5.2019
RCT/-
