Kuldeep Dwivedi Urf Pandit vs State Of U.P.
2021 Latest Caselaw 6608 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
 
 

?Court No. - 22
 
Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 443 of 2020
 
Appellant :- Kuldeep Dwivedi Urf Pandit
 
Respondent :- State of U.P.
 
Counsel for Appellant :- Ashok Kumar Singh Tomar,Saurabh Tiwari
 
Counsel for Respondent :- Govt. Advocate
 

 
Hon'ble Suresh Kumar Gupta,J.

Order on bail application

This appeal has been preferred under Section 374 (2) CrPC against impugned order dated 04.01.2020, passed by the learned Special Judge SC/ST (PA) Act, Lucknow passed in Session Trial No.551/2016, arising out of case crime no.1060/2015, under Sections - 376, 506 IPC, Police Station- Thakurganj, District- Lucknow.

Heard learned counsel for the applicant/appellant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material available on record.

Learned counsel for appellant has submitted that the appellant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case and further submitted that there are major contradictions in the testimony of the prosecution witnesses and the learned trial court without appreciating the evidence available on record wrongly convicted the appellant and further submitted that the impugned judgment passed by the learned Judge is perverse and improper and investigation is highly tainted and the learned trial court also did not appreciate the fact that the FIR was lodged by three days' delay and no plausible explanation for that is given on behalf of the prosecution and no medical report is available regarding presence of spermatozoa and further submitted that the presently appellant is in jail for about six years and he has completed more than half of the sentence awarded by this Court.

Learned A.G.A. for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that the learned trial court passed the judgment on the basis of the statement of the victim. There is no contradiction in the evidence recorded by the prosecutrix as well as first informant. Judgment of the learned trial court is sound and will reasoned and although the appellant is languishing in jail since 01.12.2015 but long incarceration in jail is not ground for bail and bail is liable to be rejected.

Considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case and without expressing any opinion on merit I am of the view that this is not a fit case for bail, so, the bail application is hereby rejected.

Order on appeal

Paper book is ready and learned counsel for the appellant is ready to argue the matter on the next date of listing for hearing.

List before appropriate Court on 20.7.2021 for final hearing.

Order Date :- 23.6.2021

mks