Allahabad High Court
Nikki @ Nitesh Sonkar 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. - 1250 of 2022
Appellant :- Nikki @ Nitesh Sonkar
Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home And Another
Counsel for Appellant :- Ramakar Shukla
Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant-appellant and learned A.G.A. for the State.
Admit.
Issue notice to respondent no.2.
Summon the lower court record.
Order Date :- 31.5.2022
Akanksha
Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 1250 of 2022
Appellant :- Nikki @ Nitesh Sonkar
Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home And Another
Counsel for Appellant :- Ramakar Shukla
Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
(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. 10 of 2020 relating to Case Crime No. 306 of 2019, under Sections 354, 504, 506 I.P.C. and Section 7/8 of POCSO Act, P.S. Dostpur, District Sultanpur.
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. 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, therefore, the applicant-appellant, who is in jail since 16.05.2022, 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 16.05.2022, 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,Nikki @ Nitesh Sonkar involved in Sessions Trial No. 10 of 2020 (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
