Heard learned counsel for the appellant on the prayer for bail, learned A.G. A. and perused the record of the case.
In S.T.No.1167 of 2006(Crime No.359 of 2005), appellant Arif alias Modi has been convicted and sentenced under Sections 395,397 and 412 I.P.C. The maximum sentence awarded to him under Section 395 I.P.C. is ten years rigorous imprisonment along with a fine of Rs.5000/- and in default of payment of fine to further undergo three months additional imprisonment.
Learned counsel for the appellant contended that the appellant has been falsely implicated in the case. That on the basis of the evidence available on record the offence for which the accused has been convicted is not made out. It has been contended by the learned counsel for the appellant that there is no reliable evidence against the applicant. That the applicant is neither named in the F.I.R. nor he was put up for identification and there is no evidence to connect him with the crime in question. That only evidence against him is the alleged recovery of golden chain. It has further been contended that the alleged recovery is also doubtful as arrest of the applicant after which recovery is said to have been made out was held doubtful in the judgment of S.T.No.896 of 2006 wherein the appellant was acquitted. It was further submitted that appellant Arif was allegedly arrested by the police on 8.9.2005 while telegram regarding his arrest was given on 6.9.2005, much earlier the date of alleged arrest and recovery. It was also submitted that the appellant was on bail during trial and there is nothing on record to show that he has misused the liberty of bail and he has every hope of success in this appeal.
Bail has been opposed by learned A.G.A.
Considered the respective submissions made by the parties. The submissions made above by the learned counsel for the appellant have substance and as such having regard to the submissions and nature of the evidence adduced by the prosecution during trial and probability factor of the case, I am of the opinion that the appellant may be released on bail during the pendency of appeal by suspending sentence of imprisonment.
Let the appellant be released on bail during the pendency of appeal on furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the C.J.M. concerned provided the appellant :2: deposits fine imposed on him by the trial court. On furnishing the required bonds and on depositing the amount of fine, the operation of the sentence of imprisonment shall remain suspended during the pendency of appeal.
28.1.2010 Tripathi