Allahabad High Court
Gopali vs State Of U.P. on 21 July, 2010
Bench: Abdul Mateen, Yogendra Kumar Sangal
1
Court No. - 25
(Crl. Misc. Application No. 29425 of 2010)
In Re : Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 780 of 2010
Petitioner :- Gopali
Respondent :- State Of U.P.
Petitioner Counsel :- Jayant Singh Tomar
Respondent Counsel :- Govt Advocate
And
(Crl. Misc. Application No. 17634 of 2010)
In Re : Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 413 of 2010
Petitioner :- Brij Kishore @ Bijju
Respondent :- State Of U.P.
Petitioner Counsel :- T.N. Tiwari
Respondent Counsel :- Govt. Advocate
And
(Crl. Misc. Application No. 17627 of 2010)
In Re : Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 412 of 2010
Petitioner :- Khusi Ram
Respondent :- State Of U.P.
Petitioner Counsel :- T.N. Tiwari
Respondent Counsel :- Govt. Advocate
Hon'ble Abdul Mateen,J.
Hon'ble Yogendra Kumar Sangal,J.
Heard Shri T.N.Tiwari, learned counsel for the appellants and learned Additional Government Advocate with respect to release of the appellants on Bail in pending appeal and perused the record.
These three appeals have been preferred by the appellants Gopali, Brij Kishor alias Bijju and Khusi Ram against the judgement and order passed by Additional Session Judge, Court No. 6, Sitapur dated 06.02.2010 whereby convicting and sentencing them with respect to the offence said to have been committed by them under Sections 394, 307, 302 & 411 IPC P.S. Khairabad, 2 district Sitapur Session Trial Nos. 1208 of 2004, 1210 of 2004 and 1211 of 2004. Appellant Khusi Ram has been convicted and sentenced also under Section 25 (1-B) Arms Act, in Session Trial No. 1209 of 2004 P.S. Khairabad, district Sitapur. The appellants have been sentenced for maximum term of life imprisonment with fine stipulation.
It is a case of the prosecution that the accused persons-appellants were not known to the complainant. They were seen in the Torch light and Truck light while they were fleeing away after looting the Truck from the seen of occurrence. No identification proceedings were conducted for identifying the accused persons. Only they were identified in the court.
It has been argued by the learned counsel for the appellants that it is a case where the conviction is based upon no evidence for the reasons :
(A) The accused persons were not named in the FIR nor they were got identified after their arrest, by the witnesses. (B) There is no evidence of prosecution witnesses to the effect that the appellants had committed the aforesaid crime. (C) There is no recovery from the appellants so as to rope them in the aforesaid crime.
It has further been argued that the appellants were on bail during the course of trial and they did not misuse the liberty of bail granted to them.
Taking into consideration over all aspect of the matter and in view of the submissions made by the learned counsel for the appellants and also considering that appeal will take considerable long time in reaching its justifiable conclusion, without going further into merit of the case, we find it 3 a fit case for bail.
Accordingly, let the appellants Gopali, Brij Kishor alias Bijju and Khusi Ram convicts of aforesaid sessions trial numbers, be released on bail on their furnishing a personal bond and two sureties (each of them), in the like amount to the satisfaction of Chief Judicial Magistrate concerned.
Realization of half of the fine is stayed and remaining half of the fine shall be deposited by the appellants within one month from the date of their release on bail.
Chief Judicial Magistrate concerned is directed to transmit to this Court photocopies of bond and sureties filed by the appellants to be preserved in the record maintained here.
Order Date :- 21.7.2010 Kaushal