Court No. - 79
Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 3941 of 2018 Appellant :- Sewaram @ Sewa Respondent :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Appellant :- Ashok Kumar Yadav,Ashish Kumar Singh Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Arun Kumar Singh
Hon'ble Ram Krishna Gautam,J.
Heard over bail application, moved by convict-appellant Sewaram @ Sewa and perused the impugned judgment Learned counsel for the convict appellant argued that the convict appellant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case crime number owing to village animosity. Initially, First Information Report was got lodged for offence punishable under Section 354-A, 452, 323, 504 and 506 I.P.C. that too, after a considerable delay of 20 days. Later on offence of rape was developed. Convict appellant is in jail since 25.5.2017. There is no likelihood of early hearing of this appeal. Hence, bail has been prayed for.
Learned private counsel for informant as well as learned AGA has vehemently opposed the bail with this contention that convict appellant is a hardcore criminal. He was previously convicted for offence of murder of village Pradhan and under threat of tamancha this act was done and it was said by victim prosecutrix that owing to above threat, she could not dare to disclose the offence and after being stable, she got this case lodged but because of involvement of her own repute and future life, she was perplexed and initially did not disclose about offence of rape even to her husband who got this case lodged but during investigation before Magistrate she narrated the offence, in which commission of rape was narrated by her. The convict appellant could not procured till exercise of proclamation under Section 82 and 83 of Cr.P.C. and in case of release on bail, there is likelihood of fleeing from course of justice. Hence, bail be rejected.
Having heard learned counsels for both sides and gone through the record, counter affidavit and rejoinder affidavit, it is apparent that convict appellant is convicted and sentenced for life imprisonment in a case of murder for which appeal is pending before this Court and he was granted bail in year 2013 but this occurrence took place in 2015 that too of commission of rape. Prosecutrix in her statement recorded under Section 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. as well before the trial Court is fully intact. Under all above facts and circumstances but without commenting on the merit of appeal, there is no case of enlargement of convict appellant on bail.
Hence, the bail application is rejected.
However, list this appeal for hearing on merit in the week commencing 23.9.2019.
Order Date :- 31.7.2019 Kamarjahan