Allahabad High Court
Kandhai Lal And 2 Others vs State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. ... on 5 December, 2022
Bench: Mohd. Faiz Khan
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Court No. - 12
Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 3041 of 2022
Appellant :- Kandhai Lal And 2 Others
Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Of Home Lko.
Counsel for Appellant :- Pawan Kumar Mishra
Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
Hon'ble Mohd. Faiz Alam Khan,J.
Heard Shri Pawan Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for the appellants as well as learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
Admit.
Summon the record of the subordinate court.
List this appeal on 11.01.2023 along with record.
Order On Bail Application
Heard Shri Pawan Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for the appellants-applicants as well as learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
This bail application has been moved by the appellants-applicants/ Kandhai Lal, Munijar Yadav and Banvari Yadav, who is convict of Sessions Trial No.100181 of 2012 (State Vs. Kandhai & another), arising out of Case Crime No.2248-A of 2009, under Section 323/34, 324/34, 504, 506 I.P.C., Police Station Kotwal Bhinga, District Shravasti and sentenced for maximum term of two years rigorous imprisonment with fine stipulation, vide judgment and order dated 23.11.2022 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Shravasti praying to release him on bail, during pendency of instant appeal.
Learned counsel for the appellants submits that the appellants have been falsely implicated in this case and nothing as claimed by the prosecution has been committed by him. It is further submitted that the trial court has committed manifest illegality in appreciation of evidence and had ignored the material contradictions, which were emerging in the evidence of the prosecution witnesses including injured witness and has convicted the appellants for the offence, which has never been committed by the appellants. It is also submitted that the appellants have been granted facility of interim bail by the trial court at the time of their conviction as the appellants have been convicted with a maximum punishment of two years and they are not having any criminal history.
It is further submitted that the appellants were on bail during the course of the trial and there is no instance of misusing the liberty granted to them by the court and there is no apprehension that the appellant-applicant after release on bail may flee from the process of law or will not cooperate in early disposal of the appeal or in any way will misuse the liberty of bail granted by this Court and he undertakes that he will remain present before this Court and will also instruct his counsel to argue the appeal when the same would be listed for final hearing.
Learned A.G.A. opposes the prayer for bail on the ground that the appellants have committed heinous offence and therefore, they be not granted the facility of bail, however, he could not confront the factual submissions made by the learned counsel for the appellants that during the trial the appellants were on bail.
Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having perused the record, it is evident that the appellants were on bail during the course of the trial and nothing has been brought to the notice of this Court, which may suggest that the liberty granted to the appellants have ever been misused by them. The appellants have been sentenced for two years' rigorous imprisonment with a fine and they are already on interim bail granted by the convicting court.
Considering the facts and circumstance of the case and keeping in view the nature of offence, evidence, complicity of appellant, punishment awarded and submissions of learned counsels for the parties and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I am of the considered view that the appellant has made out a case of bail. The bail application of the appellant is allowed. However, this prima facie view will have no impact on the final decision of the appeal.
Let the appellant-applicant/Kandhai Lal, Munijar Yadav and Banvari Yadav involved in aforesaid case be released on bail on furnishing personal bond with two sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions:-
(i) Whole fine so imposed by the trial Court shall be deposited within 30 days after actual release of the appellants from prison.
(ii) The appellants shall cooperate in the early disposal of appeal without seeking unnecessary adjournment.
(iii) The appellants shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail.
In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.
The trial court is directed to transmit the photo copies of personal bond and bond of sureties filed by the appellants to this Court at the earliest.
Order Date :- 5.12.2022
Anupam S/-
