Constable Kesari Nandan vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko

Court No. - 12

Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 2131 of 2024

Appellant :- Constable Kesari Nandan Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko Counsel for Appellant :- Hari Krishna Verma,Atul Verma,Sanjeet Kumar Patel,Sanjeev Verma Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Alok Mathur,J.

¶5

Order on Crl. Misc. Application No. 1 of 2024

¶6

Heard Sri Atul Verma, learned counsel for the applicantappellant as well as learned Additional Government Advocate for the State of U.P.

¶7

The applicant-appellant has been convicted and sentenced vide judgment and orders dated 20.06.2024 and 24.06.2024, passed by Special Judge (SC/ST Act), Sitapur in Sessions Trial No. 811 of 2004 - State Vs. Kesari Nandan and Others, arising out of Case Crime No. 246 of 2003, under Sections 306, 342 I.P.C. and Sectin 3(2)(5) of the SC/ST Act, Police Station - Ramkot, District - Sitapur. Under Section 306 IPC, the applicant-appellant has been sentenced to ten years rigorous imprisonment and fine of Rs.20,000/-, under Section 342 IPC for one year rigorous imprisonment and fine of Rs.1000/-, alongwith default stipulations.

¶8

It has been submitted by learned counsel for the applicantappellant that the appellant is a Police Constable who had taken the deceased into custody and took him to police station leaving the deceased in custody of one Siyaram, Police Constable, who is also accused in the present case. Subsequently, it was found that the deceased Dal Chand had died due to hanging in the premises of Police Station and accordingly, all the accused were charged under Section 306 IPC read with Section 342 IPC.

¶9

It is the case of the appellant that there was no eye witness of the said incident and even the other witnesses could not relate the incident to the accused and merely because the appellant had taken the deceased into custody and took him to police station, is not ground for his conviction.

¶10

Learned counsel for the applicant-appellant has vehemently urged that neither there was any independent witness nor any reliable evidence for the trial Court to have convicted the appellant. It is also submitted that the deceased was a history

¶11

sheeter and was wanted as accused in Gangsters Act and Goonda Act, besides cases of murder, extortion and loot etc. It is also informed that the applicant-appellant has suffered paralytic attack in jail and is even unable to move in the jail premises. Lastly it is submitted that applicant is in jail since 20.06.2024.

¶12

Learned Additional Government Advocate on the other hand has opposed the application for bail but does not dispute the above facts as narrated by the counsel for the applicantappellant.

¶13

Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

¶14

On considering the entire aspects of the matter, it is appears that there is no independent witness or eye witness of the incident, the applicant-appellant had taken the deceased in custody and left him at Police Station in custody of another Police Constable who was on duty at that point of time when the deceased was found dead due to hanging. Also considering the fact that the applicant is suffering from paralytic attack and is unable to move and that he is in jail since 20.06.2024, the applicant-appellant has made out a case for bail.

¶15

Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case, the material on record, I am of the considered opinion that this is a fit case for grant of bail to the appellant-applicant.

¶16

Let, the applicant-appellant Constable Kesari Nandan , convicted in Sessions Trial No. 811 of 2004 - State Vs. Kesari Nandan and Others, arising out of Case Crime No. 246 of 2003, under Sections 306, 342 I.P.C. and Sectin 3(2)(5) of the SC/ST Act, Police Station - Ramkot, District - Sitapur, be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two heavy sureties to the satisfaction of the Magistrate/Court concerned.

¶17

In case, the fine imposed by the Trial Court has not been deposited by the applicant-appellant, same shall be deposited by him within one month from the date of his release.

¶18

It is made clear that the bail is being granted to the applicant on the condition that the counsel for the appellant shall appear to argue the appeal as and when the appeal is listed. In case of default of the counsel and non-payment of fine as directed above, the bail is likely to be cancelled.

¶19

It is further made clear that in case the applicant/appellant commits any offence while on bail, the prosecution would be at liberty to file an application for cancellation of bail.

¶20

The Magistrate/Court concerned shall forward copy of the bail bonds as well as list of sureties, to this Court for keeping the same on record.

¶21

The bail application stands disposed of .

¶22

Order Date :- 26.3.2025 A. Verma

¶23

(Alok Mathur, J.)

¶24

Digitally signed by :- ANURAG VERMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Constable Kesari Nandan v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Constable Kesari Nandan v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

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

Ram Kumar vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another

Vikas Singh vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Pappu vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and 2 Others

Raju Pasi vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 4 Others

Om Prakash vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko and Another