Court No. - 50
Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 3504 of 2018 Appellant :- Seva Lal And Another Respondent :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Appellant :- Pramod Kumar Singh Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
Hon'ble Harsh Kumar,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicants-appellants, learned AGA for the State and perused the record.
Learned counsel for the applicants-appellants contends that applicants-appellants have been falsely implicated being mother-in-law and father-in-law of the deceased; that the applicants-appellants neither made any demand of dowry from the deceased nor treated her with cruelty nor committed her dowry death; that the applicants-appellants were living separately while the deceased was living with her husband in another house; that the deceased was insisting with her husband to fetch her to his workplace and due to some dispute between the husband and wife the deceased appears to have committed suicide by hanging herself; that applicants-appellants have been acquitted of the offence under Section 304-B IPC and have been wrongly convicted for the offences under Sections 498-A I.P.C. & Section 4 Dowry Prohibition Act; that the applicants- appellants have been sentenced with maximum rigorous imprisonment for two years under Section 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act and fine; that during trial applicants-appellants were on bail and have not misused the liberty of bail and are in custody since the date of judgment of conviction i.e. 05.06.2018; that the case of applicants-appellants are distinguishable from Jaswant, the husband of deceased that the entire prosecution story is absolutely false and incorrect; that there are material contradictions in prosecution evidence; that the trial court has acted wrongly and illegally in convicting the accused-appellants and they have every hope of success in appeal; that there is no likelihood of appeal to be heard in near future due to huge pendency of old appeals before the court; that the applicants-appellants have no criminal history; that the applicants-appellants undertake that they will not misuse the liberty of bail and shall remain present before the Court as and when required and they will cooperate with the hearing of appeal for which their counsel will remain present on the dates of listing.
Learned A.G.A. for the State vehemently opposed the prayer of bail and contended that the applicants-appellants have been rightly convicted for the offences; that there is sufficient evidence of offences on record against the applicants- appellants.
Considering the unlikelihood of early hearing of appeal, complicity of convicts and sentence as well as totality of facts and circumstances, at this stage without commenting on the merits of the case, I find it a fit case for grant of bail during pendency of the appeal.
Let the applicants-appellants Seva Lal & Rajeshwari Devi be released on bail on their furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of trial Judge concerned in S.T. No. 214 of 2012 Case Crime No. 72 of 2012 under sections 498-A I.P.C. and 4 Dowry Prohibition Act, P.S. Jaffarganj, District Fatehpur, and subject to deposit of 50% amount of fine imposed on them and undertaking that applicants-appellants will cooperate with the hearing of the appeal.
As soon as personal 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 :- 30.7.2018 Kamar/Vibha