CRLA/161/2023
2023 Latest Caselaw 846 UK

                   Office Notes, reports,
                   orders or proceedings
SL.
         Date        or directions and                   COURT'S OR JUDGES'S ORDERS
No
                   Registrar's order with
                         Signatures

      28.03.2023
                                            CRLA No. 161 of 2023
                                            Hon'ble Sharad Kumar Sharma, J.

Mr. Harshit Sanwal, Advocate, for the appellant.

Mr. Atul Kumar Sah, Deputy Advocate General, along with Mrs. Mamta Joshi, Brief Holder, for the State.

Admit the Appeal.

Summon the LCR.

The present Criminal Appeal has been preferred by the appellant, being aggrieved against the judgment of conviction, as rendered on 28.02.2023 by the Sessions Judge, Nainital in Sessions Trial No. 6 of 2021, State Vs. Tribhuwan Singh Negi, by virtue of which he has been convicted for the offence under Section 306 of IPC, and thereby, he has been directed to undergo 7 years of rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 10,000/- has been imposed upon him and in an event of default in depositing the fine, he has been directed to undergo 6 months of simple imprisonment.

On the perusal of the judgment impugned, it shows that the offence was committed on 22.07.2020 and thereafter when the cognizance was taken, the present appellant was taken into custody on 24.07.2020 and he continued to languish in jail ever since then and he has already served almost more than 2 years and 8 months of sentence approximately. Since, its almost 50 per cent of the total sentence, which the applicant has already served, coupled with the fact that the learned counsel for the applicant argues on the bail application, that the offence for which the applicant has been convicted, it does not holds to be substantiated by the evidence which has been adduced before the learned trial Court and he also submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in commission of offence under Section 306 of IPC.

Considering the arguments extended by the learned counsel for the appellant, in the context of, as to whether the allegation, would at all be an abatement under Section 106 of IPC, this Court is of the view that the appellant is entitled to be released on bail, subject to furnishing of his personal bond and two sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the Sessions Court concerned.

But, however, the release of the applicant would be subject to the condition of depositing the penalty amount, as it has been imposed by the learned trial Court, by the judgment under challenge.

(Sharad Kumar Sharma, J.) 28.03.2023 Mahinder/