CRLA/456/2023
2025 Latest Caselaw 1663 UK

Uttarakhand High Court

CRLA/456/2023 on 2 August, 2025

              Office Notes,
             reports, orders
             or proceedings
SL.
      Date    or directions                COURT'S OR JUDGE'S ORDERS
No.
             and Registrar's
               order with
               Signatures
                               I.A. No.6 of 2024 (Second Bail Application)
                               In
                               CRLA No.456 of 2023
                               Hon'ble Alok Mahra, J.

Mr. Ajay Joshi, Advocate for the applicant.

Mrs. Pushpa Bhatt, Additional Advocate General for the State of Uttarakhand.

Mr. Bhupendra Prasad, Advocate for the complainant.

2. This Appeal has been preferred against the judgment & order dated 06.07.2023 passed by learned IIIrd Additional Sessions Judge, Rudrapur, Udham Singh Nagar in Sessions Trial No.200 of 2018, whereby appellant has been convicted under 452 & 307 I.P.C. and was awarded maximum punishment of 7 years rigorous imprisonment with fine of ₹30,000/-. The fine was also awarded under another section, in which appellant was convicted. The appellant has sought his release on bail.

3. Heard learned counsel for the parties on the second bail application moved on behalf of appellant/applicant.

4. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that, as per the F.I.R., the alleged incident happened on 29.09.2017 at about 04:30 p.m.; whereas, the Medical Report of the victim reveals that she was brought to Hospital on 29.09.2017 at 05:40 a.m. He submits that the Doctor, who conducted the medical examination of the victim, was examined as P.W.-7 and, in his testimony, he has stated that the victim was brought to Hospital on 29.09.2017 at 05:40 a.m. and that her X-Ray was not conducted, inasmuch as, the X-Ray Technician was not available in the Hospital at 05:40 a.m. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the compliance of provisions contained under Section 313 Cr.P.C. were not complied with, inasmuch as, testimony of the victim-Shakila was not put to the accused; that, learned trial Court have not considered these vital aspects as well as the fact that, as per the Medical Report, the injury was caused due to hard and blunt object; whereas, specific allegation levelled against the appellant in the F.I.R. is that he was carrying an axe in his hand and he caused injury to the victim by the blow of axe; that appellant is in jail from the date of conviction. It is further submitted by learned counsel for the appellant/ applicant that the appellant/applicant is in jail since 06.07.2023 and has spent more than 2 years in jail.

5. Per contra, learned State Counsel submitted that appellant has been convicted after trial, based on reliable and believable evidence, therefore, he is not entitled to bail.

6. Having considered the rival submissions of learned counsel for the parties and, in particular, the sequence of incident, prima facie, this Court is of the view that since the appellant has already spent more than 2 years under incarceration, he is entitled to be released on bail. Accordingly, the second bail application is allowed.

7. Let the appellant-Farjand be released on bail during the pendency of Appeal, on his executing a personal bond and furnishing two sureties, each in the like amount, to the satisfaction of Court concerned.

8. List this Appeal for final hearing in due course.

(Alok Mahra, J.) 02.08.2025 Arpan