Allahabad High Court
Aamir 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. - 568 of 2019
Appellant :- Aamir
Respondent :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Appellant :- Mohammad Babar Khan
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. - 568 of 2019
Appellant :- Aamir
Respondent :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Appellant :- Mohammad Babar Khan
Counsel for Respondent :- Govt. Advocate
Hon'ble Rajeev Singh,J.
(Crl. Misc. Application No. 37188 of 2019)
Objection on the appeal filed by learned A.G.A. is taken on record.
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 Sessions Trial No. 523 of 2013 relating to Case Crime No.615 of 2013, under Sections 376/511 I.P.C. and Section 5/6 of POCSO Act 2012 and Section 3(1)(12) of SC/ST Act, 1989, P.S.-Kotwali Dehat, District Hardoi.
Learned counsel for the appellant submits that applicant does not have any criminal antecedent and has falsely been implicated in the present case. The applicant is in jail since 31.05.2013 and had been convicted by the learned trial court vide order dated 14.02.2019 under Section 5/6 of POCSO Act,2012 sentencing for a period of 10 years R.I. with a fine of Rs.5,000/-. As the applicant has already served out 9 years out of ten years therefore, the applicant-appellant, who is in jail since 31.05.2013, is entitled for bail.
Learned A.G.A. vehemently opposes 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 appellant-applicant has already served 9 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 14.02.2019 and in the light of the judgment of order of the Apex Court dated 25th February, 2022 passed in Criminal Appeal No. 308 of 2022 arising out of SLP (Crl.) No. 4633 of 2021 : Saudan Singh Vs. State of U.P.,he is entitled for bail.
Accordingly, the application for bail is allowed.
Let the applicant-appellant, namely, Aamir involved in Sessions Trial No. 523 of 2013 (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.
Office is directed to communicate this order to C.J.M. through Special Judge(POCSO Act), Hardoi for necessary compliance.
Order Date :- 31.5.2022
Akanksha
