Citation : 2022 Latest Caselaw 3844 UK
Judgement Date : 30 November, 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND
AT NAINITAL
SHRI JUSTICE S.K. MISHRA, J.
AND SHRI JUSTICE ALOK KUMAR VERMA, J.
30th NOVEMBER, 2022
Bail Application No.01 of 2022 In CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.291 of 2022 Between:
Vazir ...Appellant
and
State of Uttarakhand ...Respondent
With
Bail Application No.01 of 2022
In
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.292 of 2022
Between:
Adbul Gani ...Appellant
and
State of Uttarakhand ...Respondent
Counsel for the appellants : Mr. Ghanshyam Joshi,
Advocate.
Counsel for the respondent : Mr. Rakesh Kumar Joshi,
Brief Holder for the State.
Upon hearing the learned Counsel for the parties, the Court made the following
ORDER: (per Shri Alok Kumar Verma, J.)
These two Criminal Appeals have arisen from a
common judgment dated 14.06.2022, passed by the
learned IIIrd Additional Sessions Judge, Haridwar in
Sessions Trial No.377 of 2014, "State vs. Vazir and
Others", by which, the appellants have been convicted and
sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life along with a
fine of Rs.10,000/- each for the offence under Section 302
of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (in short, "IPC"); they
have been convicted for the offence punishable under
Section 201 IPC and have been sentenced to undergo
rigorous imprisonment for a period of three years along
with a fine of Rs.5,000/- each, and, they have been
further convicted and sentenced to undergo rigorous
imprisonment for a period of three years along with a fine
of Rs.5,000/- each for the offence under Section 404 IPC.
All the sentences have been directed to run concurrently.
2. Miscellaneous Application (IA No.02 of 2022)
(objection(s) to the bail application), is taken on record.
3. Heard the learned counsel for the parties.
4. Mr. Ghanshyam Joshi, learned counsel for the
appellants, submitted that the appellants have been falsely
implicated; before recovery of two skeleton, police were
present at the sight of the recovery, and, the prosecution
has failed to prove its case beyond all reasonable doubt.
5. On the other hand, the learned counsel
appearing for the State opposed the bail applications and
submitted that according to the prosecution case, there
were love relationship between the deceased, aged about
15 years, the daughter of the informant and the deceased
- Sajid; the skeleton of the deceased daughter of the
informant along with her clothes, slippers and a skeleton
of the deceased - Sajid along with his clothes were
recovered at the pointing out of the appellants, and, the
D.N.A. of the deceased persons have matched with the
D.N.A. of the blood of the mother and the father of the
deceased persons.
6. Mr. Rakesh Kumar Joshi, learned Brief Holder for
the State, further submitted that the prosecution has
examined eighteen witnesses and they have supported the
case of the prosecution.
7. At the stage of assessing whether the case is fit
for the grant of bail, the Court is not required to enter into
the detailed analysis of the evidence on record. At this
stage, detailed appreciation of evidence shall affect the
merits of the case. If a strong prima facie ground is
disclosed for substantial doubt about the conviction, it may
be a ground to grant bail. Such a ground does not appear
in the present case. Therefore, both the bail applications
have no merit. The bail applications are rejected.
8. List these Appeals on 16.05.2023 for final
disposal.
9. A copy of this order be placed on the record of
Criminal Appeal No.292 of 2022.
10. Urgent certified copy of this order be provided to
the parties, as per Rules.
________________ S.K. MISHRA, J.
___________________ ALOK KUMAR VERMA, J.
Dt: 30th November, 2022 Pant/
Publish Your Article
Campus Ambassador
Media Partner
Campus Buzz
LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026
LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!