Allowed

Akaram and 2 Others v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko.

Allahabad HC20 Nov 2024CRLA/3637/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed an interim bail application filed by appellants Akaram, Golu, and Jahoor, convicted of offences under sections of the IPC. With a maximum sentence of five years and no misuse of bail during trial, the court ordered their release on personal bond and sureties pending disposal of the appeal.

What did the court decide?

Accused-appellants Akaram, Golu, and Jahoor released on bail by furnishing personal bond and two sureties subject to conditions.

Akaram and 2 Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy… — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Court No. - 14

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 3637 of 2024

¶3

Appellant :- Akaram And 2 Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Of Home Lko. Counsel for Appellant :- Rajesh Kumar Singh,Vijayendra Prakash Tripathi Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Ajai Kumar Srivastava-I,J.

¶5

(Order on C.M. Application No.1 of 2024 : First Bail Application)

¶6

Supplementary affidavit filed on behalf of the appellants is taken on record.

¶7

2. Heard.

¶8

The instant application seeking suspension of sentence bail has been filed by the appellants Akaram, Golu and Jahoor, who have has come to be convicted for offence under Sections 323/34, 325/34, 308/34 IPC, police station Colonelganj, District Gonda.

¶9

4. Learned counsel for the applicants/ appellants have submitted the accused-applicants/ appellants are innocent, who have been falsely implicated in the present case by the first informant due to some ulterior reasons and the appellants have not committed any cognizable offence as stated by prosecution. He has also submitted that there was vague and general allegations against all the appellants, which, according to the prosecution story, are stated to assault the first informant and the injured Sameer, who has been examined as P.W.3 in the learned trial Court.

¶10

5. His further submission is that appellants had come to be convicted for offence under Sections 323/34, 325/34, 308/34 IPC without having regard to the fact that injuries were not such to attract offence under Section 308 IPC.

¶11

6. His next submission is that the appellants were on bail during trial and have never misused the liberty granted to them. The only case against the appellants is stated to be that under the Gangster Act against which learned counsel for the appellants states that by lapse of time the same has been disposed of. The appellants are in jail since 04.11.2024 and the maximum sentence awarded to the appellants is of five years only and the appeal has been filed in the year 2024, therefore, the same is likely to take time to get finally disposed of.

¶12

7. Learned counsel for the appellants/ applicants has concluded his submission by submitting that in case, the appellants/ applicants are enlarged on bail, they shall not misuse the liberty of bail and they shall also cooperate with this Court in getting the present criminal appeal decided expeditiously.

¶13

8. Per contra, learned A.G.A. for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail by submitting that the accused-applicants/ appellants have been convicted vide impugned judgement and order dated 04.11.2024, which is based on cogent and reliable testimonies of reliable injured witnesses. Therefore, he prays that the application for bail deserves to be rejected. However, he has been unable to dispute the aforesaid factual submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the appellant/ applicant including the fact that the maximum sentence awarded to the appellant/ applicant is upto five years only.

¶14

9. Having heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned A.G.A. for the State and upon perusal of record and the fact that the appellants/ applicants were sentenced for maximum of five years which was a fixed term of sentence, they were on bail during trial and there is nothing on record to show that they have misused the liberty granted to them and the appeal is likely to take time to finally get disposed of. The bail application is, thus, allowed .

¶15

10. Let the accused-appellants/ applicants, namely, Akaram, Golu and Jahoor be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties in like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to the following conditions :-

¶16

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

¶17

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

¶18

(iii) It is made clear that during bail, the accused-appellants/ applicants shall not indulge himself in any criminal activity, especially commission of any cognizable/ non-cognizable offence in respect of the victim, first informant and their family members. If he is found to have indulged in any criminal activity, the prosecution will be at liberty to file an application for cancellation of bail.

¶19

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

¶20

12. It is made clear that the fine imposed by the learned Trial

¶21

Court vide order dated 04.11.2024 shall be deposited by the appellants/ applicants within a period of six weeks from the date of their release, failing which, the bail granted to the appellants/ applicants shall stand cancelled and they shall be arrested and sent to jail to serve out the sentence.

¶22

13. It is made clear that this Court has, however, not made any observation on the merits of the appeal.

¶23

14. As soon as personal bond 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.

¶24

It is made clear that any observation made herein above, are confined to the disposal of the application seeking suspension only, as the appeal is yet to be disposed of its own merits.

¶25

(Order on appeal)

¶26

List this appeal in due course.

¶27

(Ajai Kumar Srivastava-I, J.)

¶28

Order Date :- 4.12.2024 Arnima

¶29

Digitally signed by :- ARNIMA SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Akaram and 2 Others v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Akaram and 2 Others v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Smt Renu and 2 Others vs State of Up and Another

Aayat Aziz Thru. Her Mother Shakila Bano vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home U.P. Lko. and 6 Others

X Victim in Case Crime No. 276 of 2021 vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko and Others

Belase @ Rambilas and 10 Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 2 Others

Manish Kumar Dixit vs State of U.P. and Another

Rinku vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko and 4 Others