Sunil Kumar vs State Of U.P.
2022 Latest Caselaw 5375 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 

?Court No. - 44
 

 
Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 5831 of 2018
 

 
Appellant :- Sunil Kumar
 
Respondent :- State of U.P.
 
Counsel for Appellant :- Kuldip Singh Yadav,Bratendra Singh,Dileep Kumar,Rajrshi Gupta,Sangam Lal Kesharwani,Sunil Kumar Yadav
 
Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
 

 
Hon'ble Deepak Verma,J.

Order on Appeal

List in due course.

Re: Crl. Misc. Bail Application No. 01 of 2018

Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned A.G.A. appearing for the State and perused the material placed on record.

Present bail application has been moved on behalf of the appellant who has been convicted in S.T. No. 691 of 2011 arising out of Case Crime No. 278 of 2010, under Section 498A, 304B I.P.C. and Section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, P.S. Jasrana, District Firozabad and sentenced to undergo ten year's rigorous imprisonment; for the offence under Section 498A IPC the appellant was sentenced to undergo 1 year imprisonment along with fine of Rs.1000/- and in default in payment of fine, he was further to undergo one month's additional imprisonment; for the offence under Section 4 the appellant was sentenced to undergo one year's imprisonment along with fine of Rs.1000/- and in default in payment of fine, he was further to undergo one month's additional imprisonment.

Learned counsel for the appellant submits that appellant has been falsely implicated in the present case.It is further submitted that the appellant has already served out about seven years i.e. more than 50 per cent of the total sentence awarded to him. It has been submitted that the appeal is not likely to be heard in the immediate future, therefore, as the appellant is on bail pending trial and has not misused the bail, he is entitled to bail pending appeal. It has also been submitted that in case, on being released on bail, the appellant will not misuse the liberty of bail.

Learned AGA has opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that appellant is not entitled for bail. There is no illegality and infirmity in passing the impugned judgment.

Having considered the rival submissions and the facts, since the appeal cannot be taken up and disposed of expeditiously in near future and during trial appellant has not misused the bail, without expressing opinion on the merits, I am of the view that the appellant Sunil Kumar has made out a case for release on bail pending disposal of the appeal.

Let the accused appellant Sunil Kumar 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 undertaking that he will cooperate in the hearing of the appeal.

The appellant is directed to deposit 50% of the amount of fine imposed by the trial court within one month from the date of his release on bail and the realization of rest 50% fine shall remain stayed during pendency of the appeal.

On acceptance of bail bonds, the lower court shall transmit photostat copies thereof to this Court for being kept on the record of this appeal.

Order Date :- 24.6.2022

Deepika