Allahabad High Court
Lalji vs State Of U.P. on 13 July, 2021
Bench: Deepak Verma
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 70
Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 2508 of 2021
Appellant :- Lalji
Respondent :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Appellant :- Ashutosh Mishra
Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Rajjan Singh Yadav
Hon'ble Deepak Verma,J.
Order on Criminal Appeal
Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material on record.
Admit.
Summon the lower court record.
List this case in due course.
Order on Crl. Misc.Bail Application No.1 of 2021
Heard learned counsel for the appellant, Sri Rajjan Singh Yadav, learned counsel for the informant, learned AGA for the State through video conferencing and perused the record.
The instant bail application in Criminal Appeal has been filed by the appellant against the impugned judgment and order dated 22.02.2021 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Allahabad.
Learned counsel for the appellants submits that co-accused Toofani Yadav, Awadhesh and Ram Khelawan have been admitted and granted bail by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court by orders dated 26.03.2021, 06.07.2021 and 08.07.2021 in Criminal Appeal Nos. 1429 of 2021, 2377 of 2021 and 2569 of 2021. He further argued that role assigned to the appellant is similar to the role of the other co-accused, who has already been enlarged on bail. Two bail applications is connected with this application, he claims parity. He further submitted that as appellant was on bail during the pendency of the trial and there is no instance of misuse of liberty of bail. He further submits that there is no evidence on record to prove the complicity of the appellant in commission of the crime as mentioned in the F.I.R. beyond reasonable doubt and there is no likelihood of hearing and early disposal of the criminal appeal. As such, the appellant is entitled to be enlarged on bail.
Per contra, learned A.G.A has supported the judgment passed by the court below but could not dispute the argument raised by the learned counsel for the appellant.
Considering the submissions made by learned counsel for the appellant and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this Court is of the view that the appellant is entitled to be enlarged on bail during the pendency of the appeal.
Let the appellant Lalji, involved in Sessions Trial No. 838 of 2016, arising out of Case Crime No.368 of 2014, Police Station Tharwai, District Allahabad by which the appellant has been convicted under Sections 308/34 I.P.C. rigorous imprisonment of five years and fine of Rs.5000/- under Section 325/34 rigorous imprisonment of three years and fine of Rs.3,000/- under Section 323/34 rigorous imprisonment of six months, under Section 504 rigorous imprisonment of one year and fine of Rs.1,000/- and further three months additional imprisonment in case fine is not deposited, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Chief Judicial Magistrate concerned on the condition that the appellant will cooperate with the hearing of the appeal. However, it is made clear that realization of 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.
The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad.
The concerned Court/Authority/Official shall verify the authenticity of such computerized copy of the order from the official website of High Court Allahabad and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground of cancellation of bail.
Criminal Appeal Nos. 1429 of 2021, 2377 of 2021 and 2569 of 2021 are against the same judgment in conviction order. Connect these appeals along with the present appeal.
Order Date :- 13.7.2021
Priya
