Court No. - 64
Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 6275 of 2019 Appellant :- Raju Alias Rajeev Kumar Respondent :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Appellant :- Pramod Kumar,Praveen Kumar Dubey 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-Raju Alias Rajeev Kumar has been convicted in Special Case No. 07P of 2018 (State Vs. Raju Alias Rajeev Kumar) arising out of Case Crime No. 380 of 2017, under Section 354-A, 504, 506 IPC and Section 7/8 of POCSO Act, 2012, at P.S. Phaphund, District Auraiya, whereby the appellant was convicting and sentencing under Section 354- A I.P.C. for two years rigorous imprisonment and Rs. 5,000/- fine and in default of payment fine the appellant has been directed to further undergo additional simple imprisonment for one month, under Section 506 I.P.C. for three years' simple imprisonment and Rs. 2,500/- fine and in default of payment of fine the appellant has been directed to further undergo additional simple imprisonment of fifteen days and under Section 7/8 of the POCSO Act, 2012 for four years' simple imprisonment and Rs. 10,000/- fine and in default of payment of fine the appellant has been directed to further undergo additional simple imprisonment for two months.
Learned counsel for the appellant/applicant submits that the applicant-appellant is innocent and have falsely been implicated in the present case. It is further submitted that there is no motive against applicant to commit the alleged offence. The applicant is aged about 35 years old he is marred and also have two sons. It is further submitted that the appellant/applicant is in jail since 20.09.2019. It is further submitted that the agriculture land of the appellant also situated with the land of the first informant and regarding this land some dispute between the party and due to this false case imputed against the applicant. He further submits that appellant has been convicted by the learned court below on the basis of conjectures and surmise. It is further submitted that the applicant-appellant was on bail during trial and has not misused the liberty of bail. 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. Learned A.G.A 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 Raju Alias Rajeev Kumar be released on bail on his 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