Court No. - 51
Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 6650 of 2010 Appellant :- Smt. Sumitra And Others Respondent :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Appellant :- Rahul Chaudhary,Lav Srivastava,Rahul Chaturvedi,V.M.Zaidi,V.P.Srivastava Counsel for Respondent :- Govt. Advocate,Ajatshatru Pandey,Anil Kumar Jaiswal
Hon'ble Vipin Sinha,J. Hon'ble Mahboob Ali,J.
Order on Second Bail Application
Heard Sri V.P. Srivastava Senior counsel, assisted by Sri Rajiv Narayan Advocate, Sri Anil Kumar Jaiswal learned counsel for respondent and Sri Satish Kumar Singh learned AGA for the State.
The contention of Sri V.P. Srivastava appearing for Smt. Sumitra is to the effect that the first bail application was rejected on 18.05.2011 by another Bench of this Court. Further contention is that appellant no. 1 Sumitra happens to be the women and at present she is in jail after the order of conviction dated 21.09.2010 and she has no previous criminal history. The further contention is that appellant no. 1 Smt. Sumitra has been falsely implicated in this case solely on the basis of recovery of some bones which has been recovered from a river bank. It has been informed the Court that no DNA test has been made for matching with regard to the said bones. Therefore, it cannot be said that the said bones has been with the deceased or any other person. It is next contended that in these facts and circumstances, the appeal becomes arguable and there is likelihood of the appeal being allowed if it is heard on merit, however, there is no likelihood of the appeal being heard in near future.
Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail, however he has not disputed the aforesaid contention as made by the learned counsel for the appellant.
In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, at this stage, prima facie, a case for bail has been made out. However, the said prima facie view will not, in any manner, adversely affect the case of the prosecution.
The prayer for bail is granted. The second bail application is allowed.
Let the applicant-appellant Smt. Sumitra in S.T. No. 710 of 2007 arising out of case crime no. 302 of 2004 under Section 364, 302, 34, 201 IPC P.S. Chajlait, District Moradabad, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two local sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of court concerned.
As soon as personal and surety bonds are furnished, photocopies of the same are directed to be transmitted to this Court forthwith by the concerned court to be kept on record.
Fine imposed shall be deposited by the appellant within a period of one month from the date of his release. In case of default in depositing the fine as mentioned above within the aforesaid period, the same shall be recovered in accordance with law.
Since the lower court record has been received, the hearing of the appeal be expedited under Chapter-VIII Rule 33A of the Rules of Court.
Let the paper book be prepared within two months from today and thereafter appeal be listed for hearing before appropriate Bench.
Order Date :- 26.4.2018 Ujjawal