Allahabad High Court
Jaipal Singh And Others vs State Of U.P. on 16 June, 2022
Bench: Mahesh Chandra Tripathi, Ashutosh Srivastava
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 48
Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 339 of 1983
Appellant :- Jaipal Singh And Others
Respondent :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Appellant :- G.S. Chaturvedi,Apul Misra,Krishna Kumar Patel,Prashant Vyas,Saurabh Kumar,V.P. Singh Kashyap
Counsel for Respondent :- Govt. Advocate,Kmr. Akanksha Yadav,Prem Prakash
Hon'ble Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J.
Hon'ble Ashutosh Srivastava,J.
In Re: Criminal Misc. Second Bail Application Nos.04 and 06 of 2022 filed on behalf of the appellants-Jaipal Singh and Kunwar Pal Singh
We have heard learned counsel for the applicants as well as learned A.G.A. for State on the bail application.
Present bail application has been preferred for a direction to release the applicants on bail in Sessions Trial No.104 of 1979 in Case Crime No.268 of 1979 under Sections 302/149, 201/149, 148 IPC, P.S. Kurhfatehgarh, Distt. Moradabad.
Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants have been falsely implicated in the present case. They are languishing in jail since 16.3.2022. He further submitted that initially the appellants were enlarged on bail and on account of non appearance by the Counsel, the Court while considering the bail application has issued NBW to the appellant nos.1, 2 and 3 fixing the date 31.3.2022. It is further stated that at present appellant nos.1 and 2 are aged about 90 years and 70 years respectively. Learned counsel for the appellants in support of his submissions has placed reliance on the judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court in Anil Ari v. State of West Bengal, (2009) 11 SCC 363, wherein the appellant aged about 90 years and undergoing one year imprisonment was granted bail. As such it is submitted that the appellants herein aged about more than 90 years and 70 years is on better footing and entitled for indulgence. Reliance has also been placed on the judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court dated 7.3.2022 in Shahroz Ali & Ors. v. State of U.P., Criminal Appeal No.88-89 of 2015. There is no likelihood of the appeal being heard in near future. In support of his contention he has relied upon an order of the Supreme Court dated 14.5.2018 passed in Special Leave to Appeal (Crl) No. 1319 of 2018 (Madan Singh Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh). The said order of the supreme court reads as under:
"1. We have heard the learned counsels for the parties.
2. Leave granted.
3. Aggrieved by the refusal of the High Court to suspend the sentence against the accused appellant this appeal has been filed.
4. The accused who has been convicted under section 302/34 I.P.C. and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life has undergone actual custody for a period of over seven years. The hearing of the appeal pending before the High Court is likely to take some time unless specifically expedited. We are not inclined to pass any such order.
5. Taking into account the period of custody suffered and the time within which the appeal is likely to be disposed of we are of the view that the accused appellant should be released on bail. We order accordingly. Consequently, the appellant is ordered to be released on bail to the satisfaction of the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Susner, District Shajapur, M.P. in connection with Sessions Trial No. 200/2010.
6. The learned Additional Sessions Judge, Susner, District Shajapu, M.P. is free to impose appropriate condition(s) as he deems fit.
7. Consequently, the order of the High Court is set aside and the present appeal is disposed of in the above terms."
Learned counsel for the applicants has further placed reliance on the order of the Supreme Court dated 01.10.2021 passed in Petition for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No.5845/2021 (Pintu vs. State of U.P.). The said order of the supreme court reads as under:
"Taking into consideration the fact the the petitioner is reported to be in jail for more than 9 years and 9 months, his Criminal Appeal, pending adjudication before the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, is not likely to be taken up for final disposal very soon, which fact could not be controverted by learned Additional Advocate General appearing for the State, we are inclined to grant bail to him.
The petitioner is, therefore, directed to be released on bail, subject to such terms and conditions which the concerned Trial Court shall deem fit and appropriate to impose upon him. The Special Leave Petition is disposed of in the afore stated terms."
Learned counsel for the applicants has also placed reliance on the latest order of Hon'ble 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 its judgment in Brijesh Kumar @ Ramu v. State of U.P., Criminal Appeal No.540 of 2022 dated 01.04.2022; Vipul v. State of U.P., Special Leave to Appeal (Crl) No(s).3114/2022 dt.8.4.2022 and Suleman v. State of U.P., Criminal Appeal No.491/2022 dated 25.3.2022 and 9.5.2022.
On the other hand, learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail of the appellants but could not dispute the arguments as advanced by the learned counsel for the appellants.
Considering the rival submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, facts and circumstances of the case and period of incarceration of the appellant, prima-facie, without expressing any opinion on the merits and without prejudice to the right of the appellants to pursue this appeal or pray for remission as per law, we are of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail.
Let the applicants-Jaipal Singh and Kunwar Pal Singh, convicted and sentenced by the Court below in the above mentioned cases, be released on bail on furnishing personal bond and two sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the concerned Chief Judicial Magistrate, subject to furnishing undertaking that he will co-operate in the hearing of the appeal.
The realization of fine shall remain stayed 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.
Let this appeal be listed for 'final hearing' in due course.
Order Date :- 16.6.2022/Deepika
