Heard learned counsel for the appellant on the point of admission and perused the impugned judgment and order.
This criminal appeal has been filed by the accused-appellant against the judgment and order dated 31.5.2010, passed by the learned Special Judge S.C./S.T. Act/F.T.C., Court No. 5, Hardoi in Sessions Trial No. 763/2008 (crime no. 360/2008); State Versus Naresh Nai (Naresh Kumar) under Section 377 IPC, Police Station Sandi, District Hardoi, whereby the learned Special Judge has held the accused-appellant guilty under Section 377 and has convicted and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of five years and to pay a fine of Rs. 1000/- with default stipulation.
Admit.
Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned A.G.A on the prayer for bail and perused the judgment and order of the trial court.
Learned counsel for the accused appellant submitted that the occurrence is alleged to have taken place on 19.9.2008 while the First Information Report had been filed by the father of the so called victim on 19.9.2009 which is highly delayed. The delay in lodging F.I.R. has not been explained by the complainant. The medical examination report does not support the theory of commission of sodomy with the victim. The accused had moved an application on 18.9.2008 against the brother of the victim who was accused in a case. He exhorted pressure on the accused to compound the criminal case when he did not agree, the complainant lodged a false First Information Report on the next day against the accused. The accused has falsely been implicated by the complainant on account of enmity. The appellant was on bail during trial and he did not mis-use the liberty of bail granted to him during the trial. He, therefore, deserves to be released on bail during pendency of appeal.
Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail.
Considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the appellant and learned A.G.A. Keeping in view the totality of the facts and circumstance of the case as well as the fact that the accused was on bail during the trial and he did not misuse the liberty of bail granted to him, therefore, without prejudice to the merits of the appeal, the accused-appellant Naresh Nai @ Naresh Kumar may be released on bail during the pendency of the appeal.
Let the appellants Naresh Nai @ Naresh Kumar be released on bail in aforesaid Sessions Trial number during pendency of the appeal on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the C.J.M. Concerned.
However, the fine is not stayed and the same be deposited by the appellants, if not already deposited, within 30 days from the date he release, failing which this order of bail shall stand cancelled. 21.6.2010 Santosh/-