Allahabad High Court
Sonu Alias Amir vs State Of U.P. on 22 May, 2023
Bench: Rajeev Misra
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:111955
Court No. - 49
Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 5371 of 2023
Appellant :- Sonu Alias Amir
Respondent :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Appellant :- Ambreen Masroor,Sadrul Islam Jafri
Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
Hon'ble Rajeev Misra,J.
(Order on the memo of appeal)
Heard Mr. N.I. Jafri, the learned Senior Counsel assisted by Mr.Sadrul Islam Jafri, Advocate holding brief of Mr.Ambreen Masroor, the learned counsel for appellant and the learned A.G.A. for State.
Admit.
Summon the lower Court record.
(Order on the application for suspension of sentence)
Heard Mr. N.I. Jafri, the learned Senior Counsel assisted by Mr.Sadrul Islam Jafri, Advocate holding brief of Mr.Ambreen Masroor, the learned counsel for applicant-appellant and the learned A.G.A. for State.
Perused the record.
Notice on behalf of opposite party-1 has been accepted by the learned A.G.A.
Feeling aggrieved by the judgment and order dated 31.03.2023 passed by Additional Sessions Judge/Special Judge, POCSO Court Ghazipur in Special Session Trial No. 1 of 2023 along with 253 of 2022(State Vs Sanjay Verma and 2 others) under Sections 363, 366, 368, 376, and 354 I.P.C. and 3/4 POCSO Act, Police Station Kotwali, District-Ghazipur, applicant-appellant has preferred above-mentioned criminal appeal.
By means of aforementioned judgment and order, applicant-appellant has been convicted and sentenced under Section 363 IPC and consequently sentenced to 5 years imprisonment along with fine of Rs. 5000/- and in case of default, applicant-appellant is to undergo one month additional imprisonment.
Record shows that applicant-appellant was on bail during the pendency of trial. However, he surrendered before Court below on 31.03.2023, but he was taken into custody to serve out the sentence awarded by means of above-mentioned jugdment and order. Accordingly, applicant-appellant has filed aforementioned application for suspension of sentence/bail during the pendency of appeal.
Leaned Senior Counsel for applicant-appellant contends that applicant-appellant has been convicted and sentenced only under Section 363 I.P.C. The other co-accused have been convicted and sentenced under other charging sections. The maximum sentence awarded to the applicant-appellant is 5 years. Applicant-appellant was on bail during the pendency of trial. However, there is no likelihood of the appeal being heard in near future on account of heavy pendency of appeals before this Court. He has then invited the attention of Court to the recital contained at page 23 of the paper book wherein, Court below has dealt with the statement of the prosecutrix. Drawing sustenance from the same he submits that the only allegations against the applicant-appellant is that of taking the prosecutrix to Varanasi. There being nothing to show that the applicant dislodged her modesty. Even otherwise, applicant-appellant is a man of clean antecedents inasmuch as he has no criminal history to his credit except to present one. On the above premise, it is urged by the learned Senior Counsel that applicant-appellant is liable to be enlarged on bail. In case, applicant-appellant is enlarged on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail.
Per contra, the learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail. He submits that applicant-appellant has been convicted under Section 363 I.P.C. Offence complained of is not private in nature but a crime against the society. In fact, the same falls in the category of moral turpitude. The prosecutrix is a young girl aged about 15 years. He further submits that interest of justice shall better be served in case the appeal itself is heard on merits by fixing a short date instead of deciding the bail matter. However, the learned A.G.A. could not dislodge the factual and legal submissions urged by the learned Senior Counsel with reference to the record at this stage.
7. Having heard, the learned Senior counsel for applicant, the learned A.G.A. for State, upon perusal of record evidence, complicity of applicant and accusation made coupled with the fact that applicant-appellant has been convicted only under Section 363 I.P.C. The maximum sentence awarded to the applicant-appellant is 5 years, there is no likelihood of the appeal being heard in near future on account of heavy pendency of appeals before this Court there being nothing on record to indicate that the prosecutrix was forcibly kidnapped by the applicant or her modesty was dislodged by the applicant, the statement of the prosecutrix as referred to in the impugned judgment at page 23 of the paper book speaks of the bona fide of the appellant, clean antecedents of the applicant-appellant but without making any comment on the merits of the appeal, applicant-appellant has made out a case for bail.
Let the applicant-appellant Sonu Alias Amir, be enlarged on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned.
However, the applicant-appellant shall deposit the entire amount of fine awarded by court below within a period of one month from today failing which the bail granted to applicant-appellant shall stand cancelled and he shall be taken into custody to serve out the sentence awarded to him.
Order Date :- 22.5.2023
Imtiyaz
