Court No. - 1
Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 6213 of 2016 Appellant :- Chhote Respondent :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Appellant :- Vikas Goswami,Dileep Kumar,Dr. Akhilesh Kumar,Rajrshi Gupta Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Raju Kanaujia
Hon'ble Ramesh Sinha,J. Hon'ble Dinesh Kumar Singh-I,J.
In Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.378554 of 2016.
Counter affidavit filed today by learned AGA is taken on record.
Heard Sri Dileep Kumar, learned counsel for the appellant, Sri Raju Kanaujia, learned counsel for the complainant, Sri Irshad Hussain, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
It has been contended by the learned counsel for the appellant that the appellant is said to have had some animosity with the deceased whose buffalo had gone in the agricultural field of the appellant. It is stated that the deceased was done to death by the appellant but there is no eye- witness account of the same as the incident took place in the mid-night at 4-5 a.m. Though the recovery of blood-stained knife is said to have been made at the pointing out of appellant after 24 days of the incident but the said recovery is false one. The trial court has misread the evidence on record and convicted the appellant. The appellant is in jail since 21.4.2015 for more than three years. The counsel for the appellant states that he undertakes to argue the appeal when it is listed for final hearing.
Learned counsel for the complainant as well as learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid fact as argued by learned counsel for the appellant. The learned counsel for the complainant further states that the appellant is having criminal history u/s 364 IPC, hence some condition may be imposed on the appellant as he apprehends that after his release, the appellant would create some disturbance to the informant to which learned counsel for the appellant states that in the said case, the appellant is on bail.
Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and considering the facts and circumstances of the case as well as the sentence awarded to the appellant, we are of the opinion that the appellant is entitled to be released on bail.
Let the appellant Chhote, convicted and sentenced in S.T. No.296 of 2015, case crime no.270 of 2015, u/s 302 IPC and S.T. No.349 of 2015, case crime no.318 of 2015, u/s 4/25 Arms Act, P.S. Chhibaramau, district Kannauj be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond with two heavy sureties (one should be of family member) each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned.
On acceptance of bail bonds and personal bonds, the lower court shall transmit Photostat copies thereof to this Court for being kept on the record.
It is made clear that if the appellant creates any indulgence in anti-social activities in the peaceful life of the complainant, it will be open for the complainant to move appropriate application for cancelling the bail granted to the appellant.
The hearing of the appeal is expedited.
Office is directed to prepare the paper book and list the appeal after one year before the appropriate Bench for final hearing.
It is made clear that if the learned counsel for the appellant avoids for final hearing of the appeal, it will be open for the Court to cancel the bail granted to the appellant.
(Dinesh Kumar Singh-I, J.) (Ramesh Sinha, J.) Order Date :- 26.11.2018 Gaurav