Allahabad High Court
Rajeev vs State Of U.P. on 31 August, 2022
Bench: Mahesh Chandra Tripathi, Gajendra Kumar
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 47
Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 800 of 2011
Appellant :- Rajeev
Respondent :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Appellant :- Naveen Yadav,Gaurav Kakkar,Pankaj Kumar Shukla,Pushpendra Singh,Rahul Singh Dahiya,Rajesh Kumar Pandey
Counsel for Respondent :- Govt. Advocate
Hon'ble Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J.
Hon'ble Gajendra Kumar,J.
In re: Criminal Misc. First Bail Application No.46499 of 2011
Heard learned counsel for the applicant/appellant and the learned A.G.A for the State.
A supplementary affidavit filed by Shri Pushpendra Singh Lodhi on behalf of appellant, which is taken on record.
The instant bail application has been moved on behalf of applicant/appellant- Rajeev in Session Trial No.1203 of 2007, arising out of Case Crime No.549 of 2007, under Section 302 I.P.C., Police Station Sikandarabad, District Bulandshahr.
It has been averred in the affidavit filed in support of the bail application that the applicants have been falsely implicated in the present case. The criminal history has explained in para 3 of the supplementary affidavit. He submits that the applicant is languishing in jail since 25.08.2007 and by now, he has already undergone more than 14 years imprisonment. There is no likelihood of the appeal being heard in near future.
Learned counsel for the applicants has placed reliance on the order of the Supreme Court dated 25th February, 2022 in Criminal Appeal No.308/2022 (Saudan Singh vs. State of UP) arising out of SLP (Crl) No.4633 of 2021. The relevant part of the order is reproduced 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"
Similar view has also been reiterated by Hon'ble the Apex Court in Suleman vs. State of U.P., Criminal Appeal No.491/2022 in its judgment dated 25.3.2022 and in Brijesh Kumar @ Ramu vs. State of U.P., Criminal Appeal No.540 of 2022 in its judgment dated 1.4.2022.
Learned AGA opposed the prayer of bail but he could not dispute the incarceration of the applicants.
In view of the aforesaid orders passed by the Apex Court and there being no dispute that the applicants by now have more than 10 years of imprisonment in connection with the case, without expressing any opinion on the merits and without prejudice to the right of the applicants to pursue this appeal or pray for remission as per law, we are of the view that the applicants are entitled to be released on bail.
Let the accused applicant/appellant- Rajeev be released on bail in the above mentioned case on furnishing personal bond and two sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the concerned Magistrate.
Entire fine shall maintain during the pendency of the appeal.
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.
Order on Appeal
List this appeal for 'final hearing' in due course.
Order Date :- 31.8.2022
A.N. Mishra
