Allahabad High Court
Israr Ali vs State Of U.P. on 31 May, 2022
Bench: Rajeev Singh
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Court No. - 27
Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 209 of 2020
Appellant :- Israr Ali
Respondent :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Appellant :- Manish Kumar Shukla,Yogesh Kumar Misra
Counsel for Respondent :- Govt. Advocate
Hon'ble Rajeev Singh,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant-appellant and learned A.G.A. for the State.
Admit.
Summon the lower court record.
List thereafter.
Order Date :- 31.5.2022
Akanksha
Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 209 of 2020
Appellant :- Israr Ali
Respondent :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Appellant :- Manish Kumar Shukla,Yogesh Kumar Misra
Counsel for Respondent :- Govt. Advocate
Hon'ble Rajeev Singh,J.
(Crl. Misc. Application No. 12432 of 2020)
Heard learned counsel for the applicant-appellant and learned A.G.A. for the State.
This application for bail has been moved in the aforesaid criminal appeal arising out of Case No. 35 of 2018 relating to Case Crime No. 93 of 2018, under Sections 307, 377, 506 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 of POCSO Act, P.S. Rupaidiha, District Bahraich.
Learned counsel for the appellant submits that applicant does not have any criminal antecedent and has falsely been implicated in the present case. It is further submitted that during the course of investigation, the victim was medically examined but no injury was found relating to the crime in question. The victim in his statement stated that the applicant was trying to do wrong with him, on which, he started crying and thereafter his father reached on the spot. The victim narrated the incident to his father and thereafter went to the police station. The father of the victim was cross examined in which he stated that he had gone to do palledari and when he came back in the night at 8:00 p.m., his wife narrated the incident to him. Learned counsel for the applicant vehemently submits that there is a contradiction in the statement of the victim as well as his father, but all these facts were not considered by the trial court and convicted the applicant for offence under Section 377 I.P.C. sentencing him 10 years R.I. with a fine of Rs.15,000/- as well as 10 years R.I. for offence under Section 3/4 POCSO Act with a fine of Rs.15,000/-. It is also submitted that the applicant has already served the sentence of about 4 years, out of 10 years. It is next submitted that appellant is having confidence that his appeal, which is already admitted, will be succeeded, but there is no possibility in near future for the final hearing of the present appeal. It is, thus, submitted that the applicant-appellant, who is in jail since 07.03.2018, is entitled for bail.
Learned A.G.A. vehemently opposed the prayer for bail and submits that the court below has passed the impugned order after considering the evidence placed before it at the time of trial and there is no illegality in the same. However, he does not dispute the fact that applicant has already served the sentence of about 4 years, out of 10 years.
Considering the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the appellant-applicant, learned A.G.A. and going through the record as well as the judgment of the court below dated 07.12.2019, it is evident that appellant has already served the sentence of about 4 years, out of 10 years. In such circumstances, this Court is of the view that it would not be appropriate to languish the applicant-appellant in jail till the outcome of the instant appeal.
Hence, prima facie, case for bail is made out, at this stage.
Accordingly, the application for bail is allowed.
Let the applicant-appellant, namely, Israr Ali involved in Case No. 35 of 2018 (supra) be released on bail on his furnishing personal bonds and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to following conditions;
(i) The appellant-applicant shall cooperate in the disposal of appeal without seeking unnecessary adjournment.
(ii) The appellant-applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail.
As soon as personal bonds and sureties are furnished, photocopies of the same are directed to be transmitted to this Court forthwith by the trial court concerned to be kept on record of this appeal.
In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.
Order Date :- 31.5.2022
Akanksha
