Allahabad High Court
Jagdish S/O Baburam vs State Of U.P. on 17 February, 2021
Bench: Alok Singh, Virendra Kumar Srivastava
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Court No. - 10
Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 1785 of 2009
Appellant :- Jagdish S/O Baburam
Respondent :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Appellant :- V.K. Shahi,Jayant Kumar Shahi,Neha Dhanwani,Seema Trivedii,Shailendra Singh Rajawat,Sunil Kumar Singh
Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
Hon'ble Alok Singh,J.
Hon'ble Virendra Kumar Srivastava,J.
In Re: Crl. Misc. Bail Application No.32043 of 2012
Heard Shri S.S. Rajawat, learned counsel for the applicant/appellants, learned AGA for the State and perused the record.
This is the second bail application. The first bail application was rejected by this Court vide order dated 02.04.2010.
This second bail application under Section 389 Cr.P.C. has been filed for bail of applicant/appellants Jagdish and Chhotanney, who have been convicted and sentenced vide judgment and order dated 29.07.2009, passed by Additional Sessions Judge, FTC Court No.5, Sitapur in Session Trial No.1109 of 2006, arising out of Case Crime No.872 of 2006, Police Station Kotwali, District Sitapur for life imprisonment with fine of Rs.5,000/- for offence under Section 302/149 IPC; for one year rigorous imprisonment for offence under Section 147 IPC; one year six months rigorous imprisonment for offence under Section 148 IPC and two years rigorous imprisonment for offence under Section 324/149 IPC.
Learned counsel for the applicant/appellants submits that the appellants are innocent and have been falsely implicated in the instant case. Learned counsel further submits that the trial Court without considering the material available on record has convicted the appellants. Learned counsel further submits that the witness of recovery/fard has not supported the prosecution story. Learned counsel further submits that appellants are languishing in jail since 2006. Learned counsel further submits that if the applicant/appellants are released on bail, they shall not misuse the liberty granted by this Court and shall cooperate in disposal of this criminal appeal.
Learned AGA vehemently opposed the prayer for bail and submits that the prosecution witnesses are injured witnesses and their presence on the spot is not doubtful and the first bail application of the appellants has already been rejected on 02.04.2010 and no new ground has been raised in the second bail application.
From perusal of record, it transpires that after rejection of first bail application, this appeal was listed so many times but is being adjourned on the request of learned counsel for appellants.
There is no new ground in the second bail application.
Accordingly, the second bail application is dismissed.
Order Date :- 17.2.2021
P.s.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 1785 of 2009
Appellant :- Jagdish S/O Baburam
Respondent :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Appellant :- V.K. Shahi,Jayant Kumar Shahi,Neha Dhanwani,Seema Trivedii,Shailendra Singh Rajawat,Sunil Kumar Singh
Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
Hon'ble Alok Singh,J.
Hon'ble Virendra Kumar Srivastava,J.
Office is directed to prepare paper book.
List this appeal peremptorily for final hearing in the week commencing 22.3.2021 along with other connected matters.
Order Date :- 17.2.2021
P.s.
