Prashant vs State Of U.P.
2022 Latest Caselaw 15686 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 

?Court No. - 44
 

 
Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 1819 of 2019
 

 
Appellant :- Prashant
 
Respondent :- State of U.P.
 
Counsel for Appellant :- Atul Kumar Shahi
 
Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
 

 
Hon'ble Dr. Kaushal Jayendra Thaker,J.

Hon'ble Ajai Tyagi,J.

(Order on Criminal Misc. Bail Application)

1. Heard Sri Atul Kumar Shahi, learned counsel for the accused/appellant-Prashant, Sri Mahendra Nath Pandey, learned counsel for the accused/appellant-Neelam alias Neelu in connected Criminal Appeal No. 556 of 2019 and learned A.G.A for the State.

2. This bail application on behalf of accused-appellant, Prashant convicted and sentenced in S.T. No. 402 of 2013, arising out of Case Crime No. 27 of 2013, under Section 302 and 201 I.P.C., Police Station Thana Oncha, District Mainpuri and accused/appellant-Smt. Neelam alias Neelu convicted and sentenced in S.T. No. 402 of 2013, arising out of Case Crime No. 27 of 2013, under Section 302 and 201 I.P.C., Police Station Thana Oncha, District Mainpuri.

3. It is submitted that the accused-appellants are innocent and have been falsely implicated in this case. It is further submitted that general role was attributed by the prosecution and neither any specific weapon was assigned nor any specific role was assigned to the appellants. Learned counsel further submitted thatappellants have every hope of success in appeal and they undertake that they will not misuse the liberty of bail and shall remain present before the Court as and when required and they will cooperate with the hearing of appeal for which their counsel will remain present on the dates of listing. Appellant Prashant is in jail since 21.03.2013 and appellant Smt. Neelam alias Neelu is in jail since 20.03.2013.

4. Learned A.G.A. for the State has vehemently objected to the grant of bail of the accused/appellants.

5. At the outset, the learned counsel for Smt. Neelam alias Neelu has heavily relied on the judgment of Saudan Singh Vs. State of U.P., reported in 2022 LawSuit (SC) 479. We are afraid that the said judgment will not apply to the facts of this case which we would avert to later on. The reason one is the accused-appellants are convicts for life; second-this is an appeal of the year 2019, even half the period of incarceration is not over; third- the paper-book is ready, the matter is listed for final disposal but the counsels have insisted that they would argue for bail only. Hence, we are deciding the matter on merits also.

6. The clinching evidences of the daughter of the deceased which cannot be crushed which implicates both the appellants. In that view of the matter they can not be enlarged on bail.

7. Bail application is devoid of merits and is dismissed.

(Order on Appeal)

Paper book is ready.

List the matter in the month of January, 2023 for final disposal.

Order Date :- 2.11.2022

PS