CRLA/111/2022
2022 Latest Caselaw 1772 UK

      IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND
                 AT NAINITAL
           THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE ALOK KUMAR VERMA


                     14TH JUNE, 2022

             CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 111 of 2022


Between:

Taj Mohammad and Another.                            ...Appellants

and

State of Uttarakhand.                              ...Respondent

Counsel for the Appellants        : Mr. M.A. Khan.

Counsel for the State          : Mr. Subhash Tyagi Bhardwaj,
                                 learned Deputy Advocate
                                 General for the State.

Hon'ble Alok Kumar Verma,J.

The present Criminal Appeal has been filed by

the appellants against the judgment dated

29.03.2022/31.03.2022, passed by the Special Judge

(Anti Corruption Act)/ Ist Additional District and Sessions

Judge, Nainital, in Special Sessions Trial No.03 of 2015,

"State vs. Constable Govind Prasad and four Others",

whereby, the appellants have been convicted and

sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of

one year for the offence punishable under Section 323 of

IPC and, they have been convicted and sentenced to

undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one year for

the offence punishable under Section 342 of IPC. Both the

sentences are directed to run concurrently.

2. Heard Mr. M.A. Khan, the learned counsel for

the appellants and Mr. Subhash Tyagi Bhardwaj, the

learned Deputy Advocate General for the State.

3. Heard on the Bail Application No.1 of 2022.

4. Mr. M.A. Khan, the learned counsel for the

appellants, submitted that the appellants have been

falsely implicated; there are substantial doubt about the

conviction; the appellants were on bail during the trial and

the conditions of bail were neither misused nor violated by

them, and, the appellants are on interim bail.

5. Mr. Subhash Tyagi Bhardwaj, the learned

Deputy Advocate General for the State, opposed the bail

application. However, he fairly submitted that the

appellants were on bail during the trial and the conditions

of bail were neither misused nor violated by them.

6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the

case, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the appellants,

namely, Taj Mohammad and Idrish Ahmad, provided they

submit personal bond and two reliable sureties of the

same amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned.

__________________ ALOK KUMAR VERMA, J.

Dt: 14th June, 2022 Neha