Allahabad High Court
Jameer And 7 Others vs State Of U.P. on 16 May, 2019
Bench: Pradeep Kumar Srivastava
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 80
Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 3553 of 2018
Appellant :- Jameer And 7 Others
Respondent :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Appellant :- Abhishek Mishra,Amit Kumar Srivastava,Dhirendra Babu Mishra,Dinesh Kumar Pandey,G.A.,Ramesh Chandra Mishra,Manu Sharma
Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
Hon'ble Pradeep Kumar Srivastava,J.
Heard learned counsel for the accused-appellants and learned A.G.A. for the State on bail application. Perused the record.
Sri Amit Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for the accused-appellants submits that he is not pressing bail application of accused-appellant no. 2-Farman Ali, accused-appellant no. 3-Mukhtar Ali and accused-appellant no.6-Salamuddin, hence bail request of these three accused persons is rejected.
By the judgement and order dated 23.5.2018 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 3, Maharajganj, the accused-appellants have been convicted in Sessions Trial No. 30 of 2000, arising out of Case Crime No. 09 of 2000, P.S. Parsamlik, District Maharajganj and sentenced for the offence under section 304 (2) read with section 149 IPC, ten years rigorous imprisonment and fine of Rs.10,000/-, for the offence under section 148 IPC, for two years rigorous imprisonment and fine of Rs.2,000/-, for the offence under section 504 IPC, for one year rigorous imprisonment and fine of Rs.1000/- and for the offence under section 506 IPC, for one year rigorous imprisonment and fine of Rs.1000/-.
Submission of learned counsel for the accused-appellants is that accused-appellants have been falsely implicated in this case. No specific role was assigned to the accused-appellants. All these five accused-persons are more than 60 years in age and they are in jail since 23.5.2018. Earlier also during investigation and trial they were on bail for some time and they never misused the liberty of bail. Further submission is that there is no evidence against accused-appellants and they have been wrongly convicted. The accused-appellants undertake that they will not misuse the liberty of bail, if granted.
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.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, old age of accused-appellants, accusation against them and also that there is no likelihood 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 appellants-Jameer, Sabbeer Ali, Mohd. Raja, Ahmad Ali and Amajad Ali convicted in Sessions Trial No. 30 of 2000, arising out of Case Crime No. 09 of 2000, under Sections 304(2) read with section 148, 149, 504, 506 IPC, P.S. Parsamlik, District Maharajganj, 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 :- 16.5.2019
RCT/-
