Allahabad High Court
Navneet Gupta @ Simpu vs State Of U.P. on 15 May, 2019
Bench: Pradeep Kumar Srivastava
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 80
Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 439 of 2019
Appellant :- Navneet Gupta @ Simpu
Respondent :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Appellant :- Dhirendra Kumar Srivastava
Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
Hon'ble Pradeep Kumar Srivastava,J.
Heard Sri Pramod Kumar Srivastava, 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 15.10.2018 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge/F.T.C.-1, Chandauli, the accused-appellant has been convicted in S.T. No. 113 of 2016, arising out of Case Crime No. 91 of 2016, P.S. Mughalsarai, District Chandauli and sentenced for the offence under section 498-A IPC, for two years rigorous imprisonment and fine of Rs.10,000/-, for the offence under section 304-B IPC, for ten years rigorous imprisonment and for the offence under section 4 D.P. Act, for one year rigorous imprisonment and fine of Rs.5,000/-.
Submission of learned counsel for the accused-appellant is that this is a case of suicide. The accused-appellant has been falsely implicated in this case as there was no demand of dowry nor there was any harassment of deceased. Further submission is that from the evidence available on record, it is clear that the deceased was suffering from Hepatitis-B and she was under treatment and out of that frustration, she committed suicide. This fact has not been disputed any where. Further submission is that impugned judgement itself reveals that the deceased committed suicide. Further submission is that co-accused persons have already been released on bail. The accused-appellant is in jail since 20.2.2016 and, as such, for more than three years he is in jail. He undertakes that he will not misuse the liberty of bail.
Learned A.G.A. has 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, he has not disputed that co-accused persons have been released on bail.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, nature of accusation against appellant, co-accused persons have 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-Navneet Gupta alias Simpu convicted in S.T. No. 113 of 2016, arising out of Case Crime No. 91 of 2016, under sections 498-A, 304-B IPC & Section 4 D.P. Act, P.S. Mughalsarai, District Chandauli, 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 :- 15.5.2019
RCT/-
