Court No. - 50
Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 7632 of 2017 Appellant :- Susheel & 2 Others Respondent :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Appellant :- Vikas Tripathi,Satish Trivedi,Sheshadri Trivedi Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
Hon'ble Harsh Kumar,J.
Re: Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 417757 of 2017
Rejoinder affidavit filed by learned counsel for the appellants in Court today is taken on record.
Heard Sri Satish Trivedi, Senior Advocate assisted by Sri Sheshadri Trivedi, learned counsel for the applicants-appellants, learned AGA for the State and perused the record.
Learned counsel for the applicants-appellants submits that applicants-appellants have been falsely implicated and have been wrongly convicted for the dowry death of victim being dever, mother-in-law and father-in-law of the deceased; that the appellants or any of them never made any demand of dowry from the deceased and never treated her with cruelty for non fulfilment of demand of dowry; that there may be differences between the deceased and her husband on account of which she appears to have committed suicide within three years of marriage by hanging herself; that during trial applicants- appellants were on bail and have not misused the liberty of bail and are in custody since conviction i.e. 27.11.2017; 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 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. 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 Susheel, Smt. Premlata and Ajab 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. 199 of 2006 (State Vs. Rajendra and others) connected with S.T. No. 255 of 2006 (State Vs. Ajab Singh) arising out of Case Crime No. 459 of 2005 under Section 304B, 120B I.P.C. and Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act P.S. Sadar Bazar, District- Saharanpur, and subject to deposit of entire 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 :- 25.7.2018 S. Thakur