Allahabad High Court
Ram Naresh vs State Of U.P. on 12 April, 2022
Bench: Arvind Kumar Mishra-I, Manish Mathur
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Court No. - 9
Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 1734 of 2009
Appellant :- Ram Naresh
Respondent :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Appellant :- Nagendra Mohan,Divya Gupta,Furkan Pathan,Kapil Gupta,Surendra Kumar Mishra,Udai Pratap Singh,Vishnu Kumar Srivastava
Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Shiwa Kant Tiwari
Hon'ble Arvind Kumar Mishra-I,J.
Hon'ble Manish Mathur,J.
(Order on Bail Application)
We have heard Mr. Mujahid Ahmad, Advocate holding brief for Mr. Furkan Pathan, learned counsel for appellant, learned A.G.A. appearing on behalf of State on the application for bail and perused the record of the appeal.
Second bail application has been filed pertaining to conviction recorded against the applicant in Sessions Trial No. 272 of 2007 and Sessions Trial No. 273 of 2007, Crime No.239 of 2007, under Section 302/34 IPC, Police Station Itiya Thok, District Gonda. First bail application of the applicant was rejected vide order dated 11.09.2014 passed in Criminal Misc. Application No.44784 of 2012.
The accused-applicant is in jail since 07.08.2007. Claim is that there was no rhyme or reason for the applicant convict to commit offence. No specific motive has been assigned by the prosecution for the commission of the offence and there is no reason as to why the applicant shall commit the offence. The applicant has been implicated falsely in this case. It is settled law that recovery alone would not connect the accused with actual commission of crime. The witnesses are interested witnesses and their testimony needs corroboration which is lacking. More over the applicant has already suffered more than 14 years and is in continuous incarceration and as per the present roster prevailing in this High Court there is no possibility of early hearing of this appeal.
Next contended that the appellant has suffered incarceration since 2007 and, by now, has already suffered over 14 years of imprisonment therefore, in view of the mandate dated 25th February, 2022 of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Crl. Appeal No.308/2022 arising out of SLP (Crl.) No.4633 of 2021 in Saudan Singh Vs. State of U.P., appellant is entitled to be released on bail, pending disposal of the appeal.
The order of the Apex Court dated 25th February, 2022 passed in Saudan Singh's case (supra), has been placed before us. A perusal of the order would reveal that one of the directions issued by the Apex Court, which is relevant to this case is extracted herein below:
"We have put to learned AAG and the learned counsel for the High Court that a list should be prepared of all cases where the person has served out a sentence of 14 years, is not a repeat offender, and in any case if in these cases at one go bail can be granted and cases remitted for examination under the Uttar Pradesh Prisoners Release on Probation Rules, 1938. In all these cases, there is a high possibility that if these people are released, they may not be even interested in prosecuting their appeals.
The second category of cases can be one where the person has served out more than 10 years of sentence. In these cases also at one go bail can be granted unless there are any extenuating circumstances against him.
We are quite hopeful that the High Court will adopt the aforesaid practice and thus prevent the Supreme Court to be troubled with such matters."
Learned counsel for the appellant has further engaged attention of this Court to the order dated 22.03.2022 of Hon'ble Supreme Court in Crl. Appeal No.491/2022 arising out of SLP (Crl.) No.1451 of 2022 in Suleman Vs. State of U.P., wherein also the Hon'ble Supreme Court has reiterated the same view as has been taken in the case of Saudan Singh's case (supra).
Learned AGA has stated that the appeal itself may be heard but could not dispute that in connection with the present case, the appellant has suffered incarceration about 14 years.
In view of the above quoted observations in the order passed by the Apex Court, dated 25.02.2022, in Saudan Singh's case (supra) as well as the principles laid down in the order dated 25.03.2022 passed by Hon'ble Supreme Court in Suleman (supra) and there being no dispute that the appellant by now has served over 14 years of imprisonment in connection with the case, the appeal pertains to be year 2009, the older appeals are still pending consideration for final hearing and there is no possibility of early final hearing in the present appeal on its turn, hence we are of the view that the appellant is entitled to be released on bail.
Consequently, the prayer for bail is allowed.
Let the accused appellant/applicant Ram Naresh convicted and sentenced by Sessions Judge, Gonda, vide judgment and order dated 14.07.2009 in Sessions Trial No. 272 of 2007 and Sessions Trial No. 273 of 2007, Crime No.239 of 2007, under Section 302/34 IPC, Police Station Itiya Thok, District Gonda be released on bail in the above case on furnishing personal bond and two sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to furnishing the undertaking that he will co-operate in the hearing of the appeal.
Prayer to stay the realization of fine from the appellant is rejected.
On acceptance of their bail bonds, the lower court shall transmit photostat copies thereof to this Court for being kept on the record of this appeal.
Let this appeal be listed for 'final hearing' in due course.
Order Date :- 12.4.2022
Subodh/-
