Allahabad High Court
Ramadhar vs State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. ... on 31 May, 2022
Bench: Rajeev Singh
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Court No. - 27
Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 1277 of 2022
Appellant :- Ramadhar
Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lucknow
Counsel for Appellant :- Amitabh Chaturvedi,Mohd. Zafar Khan
Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
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. - 1277 of 2022
Appellant :- Ramadhar
Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lucknow
Counsel for Appellant :- Amitabh Chaturvedi,Mohd. Zafar Khan
Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
Hon'ble Rajeev Singh,J.
(Crl. Misc. Application No. 1 of 2022)
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. 15 of 2012 relating to Case Crime No. 1316/2008, under Sections 386 & 506 I.P.C. & 2/3 U.P.Gangster Act, P.S. Hargaon, District Sitapur.
Learned counsel for the appellant submits that applicant does not have any criminal antecedent and has falsely been implicated in the present case, but the court below failed to appreciate the evidences in correct perspective and convicted the appellant. He further submitted that P.W.4, who is an independent witness has also not supported the prosecution story. It is also 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. Learned counsel for the appellant lastly submits that during trial, appellant was on bail and had never misused the liberty of the bail granted by the court below and is aged about 61 years and, therefore, the applicant-appellant, who is in jail since 02.05.2022, 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 was on bail during the course of trial.
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 02.05.2022, it is evident that appellant was on bail during the course of trial. 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, Ramadhar involved in Sessions Trial No.15 of 2012 (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
