Vishal Sharma vs Union Territory Of Jammu And Kashmir ... on 2 June, 2021
10. The learned appearing counsel for the applicants while pressing for
suspension of sentence and grant of bail in favour of the applicants
during pendency of their respective appeals would argue that the
judgement of the trial court besides being perverse and flawed is
based on no evidence connecting the accused persons with the
commission of the offences they have been convicted and
sentenced. Besides, the appearing counsels would seek bail of the
applicants on the premise that the accused persons have been
under incarceration for the last more than ten years and that since
there is no possibility of adjudication/disposal of their respective
appeals by this court in near future therefore, the applicants have
become entitled to grant of bail during pendency of their respective
appeals. The learned counsel in this regard referred to orders
passed by the Apex court in case titled as "Javed Ahmad Vs. State
of Jammu and Kashmir" (Criminal Appeal No. 632/2018 dated
15.09.2020), "A. L. Ravi Vs. The State of Karnataka" (Criminal
Appeal No. 973/2019 dated 28.08.2019) as also order dated
28.12.2018 passed by this court in case titled as "Mohinder Singh
and Ors. Vs State of J&K and Anr".