Court No. - 64
Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 5179 of 2018 Appellant :- Mukim Respondent :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Appellant :- Amit Pathak,Irfan Ahmad Malik Counsel for Respondent :- G.A. Hon'ble Suresh Kumar Gupta,J. Order on Appeal Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned A.G.A.
Perused the judgment. Admit.
Lower court record has already been received.
Upon receipt of the record office to prepare paper book and list this case in due course for hearing.
Order on Bail Application
Heard learned counsel for the appellant/applicant, learned A.G.A for the State and perused the record.
Applicant/appellant-Mukim has been convicted in S.T. No. 69 of 2016 (State of U.P. Vs. Mukim and Another) arising out of case crime No. 134 of 2015 under Sections 498A, 304B, 302/34 IPC and 3/4 D.P. Act at P.S. Kotwali Dehat, District Saharanpur, whereby the learned trial court has convicted the appellant under Section 304B and sentenced him to undergo 10 years imprisonment, under Section 498A I.P.C. for which sentenced him to undergo 3 years imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 5,000/- and in default payment of fine to undergo simple imprisonment for 6 months under Section 4 D.P. Act sentenced him to undergo 1 year iimprisonment and a fine of Rs. 5,000/- and in default payment of fine to undergo simple imprisonment for 6 months.
Learned counsel for the appellant/applicant submits that the applicant-appellant is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the present case. He further submits that appellant has been convicted by the learned court below on the basis of conjecture and surmises. Learned counsel further submits that all the witnesses of fact did not support the prosecution version and declare hostile. It is further submitted that the applicant is in jail since 05.05.2015. He further submits that no credible evidence against the appellant-applicant; that the wife of the appellant- applicant died due to consuming poison; that there there is no harassment and demand of additional demand of dowry. It is further submitted that co-accused (Mohsin) acquitted by the trial court. Learned counsel for appellant-applicant submits that due to huge pendency before this Court, there is no chance for expedite disposal of the appeal and applicant/appellant is ready to co-operate with the hearing of appeal for early disposal of this appeal.
Learned A.G.A for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that the applicant/appellant has rightly been convicted for the offence and there is sufficient evidence available on record against the applicant/appellant. He has further submitted that there is no illegality in the impugned order and judgment, hence, the applicant/appellant is not entitled for bail.
After hearing the rival submissions of the parties and perusal of record and period of sentence, without expressing any opinion on merits, I find that it is a fit case for grant of bail of appellant/applicant during the pendency of the appeal.
Let the appellant/applicant-Mukim be released on bail on their furnishing personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of Court below on the condition that the appellant/applicant will co-operate with the hearing of the appeal. However, it is made clear that the fine has not be stayed.
As soon as personal bonds and surety bonds are furnished, photocopies of the same are directed to be transmitted to this Court forthwith by trial Judge concerned to be kept on the record of this appeal.
Order Date :- 16.12.2019 Md Faisal