Paikarma And 2 Others vs State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. ...
2023 Latest Caselaw 11482 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
 
 

?Court No. - 28
 

 
Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 1106 of 2023
 

 
Appellant :- Paikarma And 2 Others
 
Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lucknow
 
Counsel for Appellant :- Afaq Zaki Khan
 
Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
 

 
Hon'ble Shree Prakash Singh,J.

Heard.

Admit.

Learned A.G.A. has accepted notice on behalf of the State.

List/put up this matter in the week commencing 22.5.2023.

In the meantime, State may file counter affidavit.

Order on First Bail Application

Heard learned counsel for the appellants, Sri Aniruddh Kumar Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

Instant criminal appeal under Section 374 (2) Cr.P.C. against the Judgement and order dated 24.3.2023 passed by IIIrd Additional Sessions Judge, Lakhimpur Kheri in Session Trial No.271/2004, State of U.P. Vs. Paikarma and others, by which appellants have been convinced under Section 304 (2) read with Section 34 I.P.C. and sentenced for seven year imprisonment and fine of Rs.500 each and under Section 323 read with Section 34 I.P.C. sentenced for 3 months imprisonment.

Learned counsel for the appellants submits that the appellants are innocent and they have falsely been implicated in the instant matter. He next added that incident took place on 20.3.2000 and the deceased was referred to the Hospital at Lucknow where he died on 25.3.2000. The weapon alleged to be used in the offence is not fatal. The trial court did not consider and appreciate the evidence in the right perspective. He next added that there are cross-version of the F.I.Rs. and both the parties received injuries and, thus, it was not pre-meeting of minds but it happened with sudden provocation. Intent is missing but the trial court has not appreciated the facts while passing the Judgment and order. He submits that the appellants were on bail during trial and they never misused the liberty of bail. He further submits that except apart the instant matter, there is no any criminal record of the appellants and the appellants are law abiding citizens and they undertake that in case they are granted bail, they will not misuse the liberty and would co-operate in proceedings.

Learned A.G.A. for the State has also opposed the contention of the appellants and submitted that deceased was brutally beaten by the appellants as a result of which he died. He next added that trial court has rightly appreciated the evidence adduced by the prosecution and passed the Judgment and order, thus, the appellant is not entitled for any relief.

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and after perusal of the record, it is evident that matter pertains to the year 2000; F.I.Rs. were lodged against the complainant as well as the appellants and both the parties have been convicted; further the appellants were on bail during trial; there is no such report or fact that bail was ever misused by the appellants; weapon used is not fatal; and the appellants have no criminal antecedents, hence, I find it a fit case for bail.

Let the appellants Paikarma, Shri Ram and Kallu be released on bail in the aforementioned sessions trial, during the pendency of appeal on their furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned.

It is made clear that fine is not stayed.

On acceptance of bail bonds, the court concerned shall transmit the photo stat copies thereof to this Court for being kept on the record.

Order Date :- 18.4.2023

Ram Murti