Allahabad High Court
Shyam Singh vs State Of U.P. on 12 March, 2021
Author: Vipin Chandra Dixit
Bench: Vipin Chandra Dixit
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Court No. - 85 Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 1338 of 2021 Appellant :- Shyam Singh Respondent :- State of U.P. Counsel for Appellant :- Rajiv Sisodia,Dhirendra Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Respondent :- G.A. Hon'ble Vipin Chandra Dixit,J.
Order on Criminal Appeal Heard Sri Rajiv Sisodia, learned counsel for the appellant and learned A.G.A. for the State.
Admit.
Summon the lower court record.
List this case in the week commencing 12.04.2021 before appropriate Court.
Order on Bail Application Heard Sri Rajiv Sisodia, learned Counsel for the applicant/ appellant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
The applicant/appellant has been convicted in Special Session Trial No.42 of 2014 (State Vs. Shyam Singh) arising out of Case Crime No.174 of 2013, under Sections 354ka, 506 I.P.C. and Section 8 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, Police Station Mahila Thana, District Amroha and sentenced to undergo imprisonment of three years with fine of Rs. 3000/- under Section 506 I.P.C. and to undergo imprisonment of four years with fine of Rs.5,000/- under Section 8 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 and in the event of default in payment of fine to undergo additional imprisonment for three months.
It is submitted by learned Counsel for the applicant/appellant that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. Sister of applicant Smt. Poonam had lodged first information report against her husband Rahul and in laws and victim is sister of Rahul and on account of that enmity applicant was roped in this case. The defence evidence was adduced by the applicant but was not considered by trail court. Prosecution has failed to established the case against the applicant/appellant but the trial court without appreciating the evidence and materials which are available on record has passed the order of conviction. It is further submitted that the applicant/appellant was on bail during the pendency of the trial and there is no instance of misuse of liberty of bail, therefore, the applicant/ appellant is entitled to be enlarged on bail during the pendency of the appeal. Lastly, it is submitted that due to huge pendency of criminal appeals before this Court, there is no chance for early disposal of the appeal and applicant/appellant is ready to co-operate with the hearing of appeal.
Per contra learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail and has submitted that applicant/ appellant has rightly been convicted by the trial court and applicant/appellant is not entitled for bail.
Considering the submissions made by learned counsel for the applicant/ appellant and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this Court is of the view that the applicant/appellant is entitled to be enlarged on bail during the pendency of the appeal.
Let the applicant/appellant Shyam Singh be released on bail on his executing personal bond and furnishing two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to deposit of entire amount of fine imposed on him and undertaking that applicant/appellant will co-operate with the hearing of the appeal.
On acceptance of bail bonds, the lower court shall transmit photostat copies thereof to this Court for being kept on the record of this appeal.
Order Date :- 12.3.2021 Radhika