Court No. - 51
Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 4514 of 2019 Appellant :- Javed Akhtar Respondent :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Appellant :- Sharique Ahmed Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
Hon'ble Vipin Sinha,J.
Order on bail application No.01 of 2019.
Heard Sri Sharique Ahmed, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Mohd. Nadeem, learned AGA appearing for the State.
In the present case bail is being sought in appeal against the order of conviction.
We have perused the impugned judgment and order passed by the trial court convicting the appellant.
It has been contended by the counsel for the applicant that the applicant was on bail during the trial, but the liberty was not misused or abused by him. Much reliance has been placed on the observations which has been made by the another Bench of this Court while granted bail to the applicant vide order dated 08.05.2013 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 5070 of 2013. The observation is being extracted herein below:-
"Learned counsel for the applicant argued that the applicant is real brother of complainant and uncle of the injured. The applicant is suffering from mental disorder much prior to the alleged incident. As per medical investigations calcified nodule is seen in frontal region of his brain. The applicant, under mental disorder, has caused injuries to the injured who is none else but his own nephew. Thus, from the conduct of the applicant, it is obvious that he is not normal and suffering with mental disorder. He also inflicted injury upon himself on two occasions, during custody. Thus, at the time of incident, the applicant was unable to know consequences of his act. Accordingly, he also deserves to be enlarged on bail on the basis of mental sickness."
The further contention is that at present the applicant is in jail since 25.05.2019, with no previous criminal history. It is a case of single grievous injury. It is next contended that in these facts and circumstances, the appeal becomes arguable and there is likelihood of the appeal being allowed or the sentence being modified, if it is heard on merit, however, there is no likelihood of the appeal being heard in near future.
Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail, but could not dispute the aforesaid facts as argued by the counsel for the applicant.
In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, at this stage, a case for bail has been made out. However, the said prima facie view will not in any manner adversely affect the case of the prosecution.
The prayer for bail is granted. The bail application is allowed.
Let the applicant-appellant Javed Akhtar convicted and sentenced vide impugned judgment in S. T. No. 229 of 2012, arising out of Case Crime No. 86 of 2012, under Section 307 IPC, Police Station Dakshin Tola, District Mau, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two local sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of court concerned.
As soon as personal and surety bonds are furnished, photocopies of the same are directed to be transmitted to this Court forthwith by the concerned court to be kept on record.
The appellant is directed to deposit fifty per cent of the fine within a period of one month from the date of his release from jail. The realization of rest of the fine shall remain stayed during the pendency of the appeal. It is made clear that in case, the fine, as directed, is not deposited within the time as specified above, the same shall be recovered in accordance with law.
Order Date :- 22.8.2019/VKG