Allahabad High Court
Krishna Bhagwan Mishra vs State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. ... on 15 December, 2023
Author: Karunesh Singh Pawar
Bench: Karunesh Singh Pawar
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC-LKO:82853
Court No. - 13
Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 3489 of 2023
Appellant :- Krishna Bhagwan Mishra
Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko.
Counsel for Appellant :- Shailendra Singh,Surendra Singh Yadav
Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.
(Order on appeal)
The present appeal has been filed against the judgment and order dated 22-11-2023 PASSED BY ADDITIONAL SESSION JUDGE SPECIAL JUDGE- SPECIAL COURT NUMBER 4, LUCKNOW IN SESSION TRIAL NUMBER 02/2001, STATE VERSUS JAIRAM & OTHERS ARISING OUT OF CASE CRIME NUMBER 296/1998, UNDER SECTION 419, 420, 506, 120 (B) I.P.C., 7/13(1)(D) and 13(2) PREVENTION OF CORRUPTION ACT RELATING TO POLICE STATION BAZAARKHALA, DISTRICT LUCKNOW WHEREBY THE APPELLANT HAS BEEN CONVICTED AND SENTENCED HIM UNDER SECTION 419 I.P.C. RIGOUROUS IMPRISONMENT FOR TWO YEARS AND FINE OF RUPEES ONE THOUSAND RUPEES, UNDER SECTION 420 I.P.C. IMPRISONMENT FOR THREE YEAR AND FINE OF RUPEES THREE THOUSAND, UNDER SECTION 120 (B) I.P.C. RIGOUROUS IMPRISONMENT FOR THREE YEARS AND FINE OF RUPEES THREE THOUSAND, UNDER SECTION 506 I.P.C. RIGOUROUS IMPRISONMENT FOR TWO YEARS AND FINE OF RUPEES ONE THOUSAND, UNDER SECTION 12 PREVENTION OF CORRUPTION ACT I.P.C. RIGOUROUS IMPRISONMENT FOR THREE YEARS AND FINE OF RUPEES THREE THOUSAND, with default provision in each of the offences.
Heard.
Admit.
Summon the lower court record.
Office is directed to list this appeal on its turn.
(Order on bail application)
Heard learned counsel for the appellant-applicant, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State and perused the record.
Learned counsel for the appellant-applicant submits that the appellant-applicant has been sentenced for a maximum period of three years. The appellant-applicant was on bail during trial and he has not misused the liberty of bail. Presently, he is on interim bail.
It is lastly submitted that the appellant-applicant has no other criminal history and the appeal is not likely to be decided in the near future.
Learned A.G.A. opposes the prayer for bail of the appellant-applicant, on the ground that, the appellant-applicant has committed a serious and heinous offence and has been rightly convicted by the court below, and the appellant-applicant is not entitled for bail. However, he could not confront the factual submissions made by learned counsel for the appellant-applicant.
On due consideration to the fact that the appellant-applicant has been sentenced for a maximum period of three years and considering the fact that during trial appellant-applicant was on bail, he has not misused the liberty of bail; presently he is on interim bail; he has no other criminal history and further that there is no likelihood that the present appeal may be listed for hearing in the near future, this Court is of the view that the case for bail is made out.
Accordingly, the bail application is allowed.
Let the appellant-applicant involved in aforesaid case be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond with two sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned.
Fine imposed by the trial court shall be deposited by the appellant-applicant within a period of two months from the date of his release.
The appellant-applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail.
It is made clear that the bail is being granted to the appellant/applicant on the condition that the counsel for the appellant shall appear to argue the appeal as and when the appeal is listed.
It is further made clear that in case the applicant/appellant commits any offence while on bail, the prosecution would be at liberty to file an application for cancellation of the bail.
Order Date :- 15.12.2023/R.C.
