Allahabad High Court
Neeraj Kumar vs State Of U.P. on 9 February, 2021
Bench: Suresh Kumar Gupta
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 87
Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 1089 of 2020
Appellant :- Neeraj Kumar
Respondent :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Appellant :- Rajiv Sisodia,Dhirendra Kumar Srivastava,Veer Singh
Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
Hon'ble Suresh Kumar Gupta,J.
(Order on Appeal)
Heard.
Admit.
Summon the lower court record.
List in due course after receipt of record.
(Order on Bail Application)
Heard learned counsel for appellant, learned AGA for the State and perused the record.
Applicant / appellant has been convicted in S.T. No. 111 of 2017 (State Vs. Neeraj Kumar) arising out of Case Crime No.597 of 2017, under section 376 (2) (Jh) I.P.C., P.S. Chandpur, District Bijnor and has been sentenced for 10 years rigorous imprisonment and fine of Rs.30,000/-.
Learned counsel for the appellant / applicant submits that the appellant / applicant is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the present case due to malafide intention. It is further submitted that the victim was a consenting party and as per medical report no internal or external injury found on the body of the victim. It is also submitted that as per High School Certificate victim was minor but as per radiological report age of the victim is 19 years. Learned counsel further submits that the learned trial court without appreciating the evidence on record has convicted the appellant / applicant. Learned counsel further submits that the appellant / applicant is on bail during trial and never misused the liberty of bail. Learned counsel next submitted that due to huge pendency before this Court, there is no chance for expedite disposal of the appeal and appellant / applicant is ready to co-operate with the hearing of appeal for early disposal of this appeal.
Learned A.G.A for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that the applicant / appellant has rightly been convicted for the offence and there is sufficient evidence available on record against the applicant/appellant. Learned A.G.A has further submitted that there is no illegality in the impugned order and judgment, hence, the applicant/appellant is not entitled for bail.
After hearing the rival submissions of the parties and perusal of record and period of sentence, without expressing any opinion on merits, I find that it is a fit case for grant of bail of appellant / applicant during the pendency of the appeal.
Let the appellant / applicant Neeraj Kumar be released on bail on their furnishing personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of Court below on the condition that the appellant / applicant will co-operate with the hearing of the appeal. However, it is made clear that the fine has not been stayed.
As soon as personal bonds and surety bonds are furnished, photocopies of the same are directed to be transmitted to this Court forthwith by trial Judge concerned to be kept on the record of this appeal.
Order Date :- 9.2.2021
Md Faisal
