Court No. - 78
Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 780 of 2021 Appellant :- Sandeep @ Pintu Respondent :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Appellant :- Arvind Agrawal,Ajit Kumar Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Dwijendra Prasad
Hon'ble Naveen Srivastava,J.
Order on appeal Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned A.G.A. for the State of U.P. and perused the record.
Learned A.G.A. has accepted notice on behalf of the State.
As per office report, lower Court's records has already been summoned.
List this appeal for hearing in due course.
Order in Bail Application Learned counsel for the appellant-applicant submits that appellant has wrongly been convicted and sentenced for the offence under Section 363 & 366 I.P.C. It is further submitted that appellant has been acquitted from the charges under Section 302 I.P.C. read with Section 34 and 201 I.P.C. It is also submitted that F.I.R. was lodged after more than two months of delay and there is no possible explanation. It is also submitted that entire prosecution story is false and fabricated and material is in contradiction of the prosecution evidence. The Trial Court has acted wrongly and illegally in convicting the accused- appellant. He also submits that there is no evidence on record which indicates the involvement of the accused-applicant in the present case. It is further submitted that appellant-applicant, who was on bail during the pendency of trial and there is no instance of misuse of liberty of bail, therefore, the appellant is entitled to be released on bail during the pendency of appeal. He shall remained present before the Court as and when required and he will cooperate with the hearing of the appeal for which his counsel will be present on the date of hearing. It is further submitted that appellant is languishing in jail since 24.11.2018.
Per contra, learned A.G.A. vehemently opposed the prayer for bail and contended that the applicant/appellant has been rightly convicted for the offence and there is sufficient evidence of offence on record against the applicant/appellant.
Considering the submissions made by learned counsel for the appellant and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this Court is of the view that the appellant is entitled on bail during the pendency of the trial.
Let the appellant, Sandeep @ Pintu be released on bail on his executing a personal bond and furnishing two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned in Sessions Trial No. 536/2012 (State vs. Sandeep @ Pintu & Others), arising out of Case Crime no. 160 of 2010, under Sections 363 & 366 I.P.C., P.S. Jasrana, District-Firozabad.
Subject to appellant depositing half of the fine imposed upon him, recovery of remaining amount shall remain stayed.
On acceptance of bail bond and personal bond, the lower court shall transmit photostat copies thereof to this Court for being kept on the record of this appeal.
The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad, self attested by learned counsel for the applicant along with a self attested identity proof of the said persons (preferably Aadhar Card) mentioning the mobile number (s) to which the said Aadhar Card is linked before the concerned Court/Authority/Official The concerned Court/Authority/Official shall verify the authenticity of such computerized copy of the order from the official website of High Court Allahabad and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing.
Order Date :- 24.8.2021 Sachin