Uttarakhand High Court
CRJA/11/2021 on 24 March, 2022
Office Notes, reports,
orders or proceedings
SL.
Date or directions and COURT'S OR JUDGES'S ORDERS
No
Registrar's order
with Signatures
CRJA No.11 of 2021
Shri Sanjaya Kumar Mishra, ACJ.
Shri Ramesh Chandra Khulbe, J.
Mr. Siddhartha Bankoti, learned counsel
for the appellant.
Mr. J.S. Virk, learned Deputy Advocate
General along with Mr. Rakesh Kumar Joshi,
learned Brief Holder, for the State.
Heard the learned counsel for the parties
on bail application (IA 1 of 2021).
This is an application for suspension of
sentence and grant of bail to the appellant,
namely, Rajveer @ Vicky, who has been
convicted u/s 302/34 IPC and sentenced to
undergo imprisonment for life with fine of
Rs.1,000/-; he was further convicted u/s
394/34 IPC and sentenced to undergo seven
years' R.I. with fine of Rs.1,000/-; and he was
also convicted u/s 201 IPC and sentenced to
undergo one year's R.I. with fine of Rs.500/-;
in case of default of fine, he was directed to
undergo three months' R.I. under each count;
all the aforesaid sentences were directed to
run concurrently.
It is apparent from the record that the
prosecution case is based entirely on
circumstantial evidence. The circumstance of
'last seen theory' and recovery of weapon of
offence, besides some cash from the appellant,
has been established in this case. His wearing
apparels were also found to be stained in
blood.
However, the appellant is in custody for
last 19 year and 9 months. In the meantime,
co-convicts Ashwani Pal and Sachin Pal
preferred CRLA Nos.403 of 2003 and 12 of
2011 respectively; as per judgment dated
9.9.2011, the appeal preferred by the
appellant Ashwani Pal was allowed, he was
acquitted of the offence, and was directed to
be set at liberty; by the selfsame judgment,
the appeal preferred by appellant Sachin Pal
was dismissed confirming the judgment and
order under appeal as well as the sentence.
The present appellant is a permanent
resident of District Dehradun, so there is no
reasonable apprehension of his absconding
from the process of justice; this is a case of
year 2021, so, there is no reasonable
probability that the appeal will be taken up at
an early stage for final disposal. Moreover,
there is no allegation, on behalf of the
prosecution, that the appellant may tamper
with the prosecution evidence, if he is released
on bail.
In that view of the matter, we are inclined
to suspend the sentence of appellant and to
grant him bail.
Accordingly, the bail application is
allowed. The sentence, i.e. imprisonment and
fine both, as awarded to the appellant i.e.
Rajveer @ Vicky by the learned Additional
Sessions Judge/First FTC, Dehradun vide
judgment and order dated 19.09.2003 in
Sessions Trial No.120 of 2002 is hereby
suspended qua present appellant. The
appellant shall be released on bail, on such
terms and conditions as deemed just and
proper by the learned Trial Court in the
aforesaid case.
Urgent certified copy of this order be
supplied to the learned counsel for the parties,
as per Rules.
(R.C. Khulbe, J.) (S.K. Mishra, ACJ.)
24.03.2022
Rdang
