Allahabad High Court
Anil Saroj vs State Of U.P. on 10 February, 2023
Bench: Attau Rahman Masoodi, Renu Agarwal
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Court No. - 10
Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 1897 of 2021
Appellant :- Anil Saroj
Respondent :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Appellant :- Amrit Kumar Tiwari,Rajesh Kumar Shukla
Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
Hon'ble Attau Rahman Masoodi,J.
Hon'ble Mrs. Renu Agarwal,J.
C.M. Application Nos.158782 of 2021
Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned A.G.A. for the State.
This is first bail application filed on behalf the of appellant-applicant, who is convicted and sentenced for life imprisonment in Sessions Trial No.149 of 2014 arising out of Case Crime No.19 of 2014, under Sections- 147, 148, 149, 302/149 I.P.C. registered at Police Station- Antu, District- Pratapgarh.
The appellant-applicant was enlarged on bail during the course of trial and has not misused the liberty of bail.
Learned counsel for the appellant has argued that the F.I.R. as well as the oral testimony of witnesses recorded by the trial court has attributed a specific role of causing fire-arm injury to the present appellant-applicant. The ante mortem injuries do not indicate that the deceased persons were inflicted any fire arm injury. The corroborative evidence also does not make out a case beyond reasonable doubt for the conviction of the present appellant-applicant whose role is distinguishable and, stands on a different footing as compared to the other accused persons possessed with lathis or iron rods or any other sharp edged weapon as such. These roles are attributed to the other accused-persons who have been simultaneously convicted through the impugned judgment.
Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail arguing that the conviction under challenge is with the aid of Section 149 Cr.P.C. and therefore, the common object of the accused persons was definite, as such, the impugned judgment does not suffer from any illegality whatsoever.
Having considered the submissions put forth by the learned counsel for the parties and looking to the fact that the appellant-applicant has not misused the liberty of bail during the course of trial, and having regard to the distinguishable role of the present appellant-applicant being situated on a different footing as compared to the other co-accused persons, prima facie, we are of the view that a case for grant of bail is made out.
Let appellant-applicant - Anil Saroj, convicted and sentenced in Sessions Trial No.149 of 2014 arising out of Case Crime No.19 of 2014, under Sections- 147, 148, 149, 302/149 I.P.C. registered at Police Station- Antu, District- Pratapgarh, be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned.
On acceptance of his bail bond, the lower Court shall transmit photostat copies thereof to this Court for being kept on the record of this appeal.
It is made clear that in case the appellants indulge in committing any other offence, the prosecution will be at liberty to seek cancellation of bail granted by virtue of this Court's order.
Order Date :- 10.2.2023
Mohd. Sharif
