Allowed

Ashok Kumar and 3 Others v. State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Deptt. Lko

Allahabad HC11 Jun 2024CRLA/1862/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single bench hearing the bail application under Section 389 Cr.P.C. arising out of a criminal appeal. The Court allowed the application, suspending the trial court sentence during the appeal pendency, and granted bail with specific conditions.

What did the court decide?

Bail allowed to the appellants upon deposit of fine and furnishing bond with two sureties; sentence suspended pending appeal.

Ashok Kumar and 3 Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy… — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Court No. - 12

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 1862 of 2024

¶3

Appellant :- Ashok Kumar And 3 Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Secy. Deptt. Lko Counsel for Appellant :- R.N. Shukla Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Saurabh Lavania,J.

¶5

(On Appeal)

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the appellants and learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶7

Admit.

¶8

Summon the trial court record.

¶9

List this appeal for final disposal alongwith trial court record.

¶10

(On C.M. Application No. 1 of 2024)

¶11

This application under Section 389 Cr.P.C. has been moved in the instant criminal appeal arising out of Sessions Trial No. 159 of 2017, Case Crime No. 151 of 2015, under Sections- 308, 323, 325, 504, 506 I.P.C., P.S.- Hasanganj, District- Unnao.

¶12

Sri Kuldeep Dubey, who appeared for the appellants, while pressing the application preferred by the appellants under Section 389 Cr.P.C. submitted that the trial court while convicting and sentencing the appellants under Section 308 and 325 IPC committed error of law and fact both, as according to the evidence available on record, the incident occurred without premeditation of mind on the spur of moment, in which, injuries sustained were not fatal in nature and accordingly, the Section 324 IPC would be attracted against the appellants and not Section 308 and 325 IPC and the trial court without taking note of the facts and evidence on record including basic story narrated in the FIR, passed the judgment of conviction thereby convicting the appellants under Section 308 and 325 IPC.

¶13

It is further submitted that during trial, the appellants were on bail and this liberty of bail was never misused by them.

¶14

Learned A.G.A. vehemently opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that the court below has passed the impugned order

¶15

after considering the evidence placed before it at the time of trial and there is no illegality in the same. However, he does not dispute the fact that appellants were on bail during the course of trial.

¶16

Considering the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the appellants, learned A.G.A. and the judgment of the trial court as also the fact that appellants were on bail during trial and they never misused the liberty as also the fact that final hearing in this appeal in near future is bleak, this Court is of the view that it would be appropriate to suspend the sentence of the appellants and to grant bail to them til outcome of the instant appeal.

¶17

Accordingly, the bail application is allowed . The sentence imposed by the trial court shall remain suspended during pendency of present appeal.

¶18

Let the appellants, namely, Ashok Kumar, Daulat, Om Prakash and Shiv Kumar involved in aforesaid Case Crime Number be released on bail on depositing the amount of fine within a period of one month from the date of their release and on furnishing personal bond of Rs.25,000/- and two sureties each in the like amount, subject to following conditions:

¶19

(i) The appellants shall cooperate in the early disposal of appeal without seeking unnecessary adjournment.

¶20

(ii) The appellants shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail.

¶21

As soon as personal bonds and sureties are furnished, photocopies of the same are directed to be transmitted to this Court forthwith by the trial court concerned to be kept on record of this appeal.

¶22

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.

¶23

Order Date :- 11.6.2024 Arun/-

¶24

Digitally signed by :- ARUN KUMAR GANGWAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Ashok Kumar and 3 Others v. State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Deptt. Lko

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ashok Kumar and 3 Others v. State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Deptt. Lko

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mohammad Imran vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, U.P. Civil Sectt. Lko. and Another

Mahesh Kumar and 5 Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko. and Another

Richa Mishra vs Shri Surendra Tiwari, the Secy. U.P. Basic Shiksha Parishad, Prayagraj and Another

Maniram vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Kurindra Singh vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.

Sunil and 3 Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin.Secy. Home