Court No. - 52
Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 1826 of 2018 Appellant :- Sudhir Kumar Gaud Respondent :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Appellant :- Manu Sharma,Dinesh Kumar Pandey Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
Hon'ble Rajul Bhargava,J.
Heard Sri Manu Sharma, Sri Dinesh Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the appellant, learned AGA for the State and perused the record.
The instant criminal appeal has been filed by applicant-appellant against the judgement and order dated 30.11.2017 passed by Additional Session Judge, (F.T.C. no. -2) District Maharajganj in S.T. No. 152 of 2010 arising out of Case Crime No. 779/2010, u/s 498A, 304B IPC and section 4 of D.P. Act, P.S. Paniyara, District Maharajganj.
The submission of learned counsel for the applicant is that he is husband of the deceased; the marriage was solemnized about three years back; the prosecution version of demand of dowry by the appellant is absolutely false; relations between the applicant and his wife were very cordial. It is argued that defence has laid evidence that the deceased had some altercation with her parents on a petty issue and out of frustration she committed suicide by consuming Organochloro insecticide poison; in the post mortem report one injury in the nature of contusion has been noted but it is argued that in normal circumstances Organochloro insecticide cannot be forcibly administered to any person and it is a case of suicide. It is submitted that there are material contradictions with regard to demand of dowry and consequent torture between the statement of prosecution witnesses. Lastly it is contended that the appellant is continuously in jail since 29.7.2010 i.e. more than eight years and maximum sentence awarded to the appellant is ten years thus he has already undergone major part of the sentence and, therefore, on the ground of long incarceration he may be enlarged on bail. There is no possibility of early disposal of the appeal due to heavy dockets.
In the facts of the case, without expressing anything on the merit of the case I am satisfied that a case for grant of bail to the applicant is made out. The Bail Application is allowed.
Let the applicant-appellant Sudhir Kumar Gaud convicted and sentenced in the aforesaid session trial, during the pendency of the appeal be released on bail subject to his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned.
On acceptance of the bail bonds and personal bonds, the lower court shall transmit the photostat copies thereof to this Court for being kept on record of the instant criminal appeal.
The 50% fine out of total fine awarded by the court below under the impugned judgement shall be deposited by the applicant-appellant before his release on bail. List in due course for hearing.
Order Date :- 26.11.2018 Dhirendra/