Heard Mr. R.P. Dwivedi, learned counsel for the appellant, learned AGA on the matter of admission and bail and perused the record. Admit.
It has been argued by Mr. Dwivedi that the statement of the girl recorded would not have been believed by the trial court as in the statements recorded under Section 161, Cr.P.C. or under Section 164, Cr.P.C. the prosecutrix did not say anything about the kidnapping/abduction or of committing rape by the appellant and therefore, he should be granted bail more particularly when he was on bail during the pendency of trial which he did not misuse. Considering the argument, I do find it a case fit for the grant of bail. The appellant Sani @ Vedu is admitted to bail during the pendency of the appeal in S.T. No.697/05, case crime no.384/04, under Section 363, 366, 376, IPC, P.S. Jagdishpura, District Agra on his executing a personal bond of Rs.20,000/- with two sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned. It is further directed that during the pendency of this appeal the execution of the sentence shall remain suspended.
Order Date :- 2.4.2010 T. Sinha