Allowed

Azeem Khan v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC27 Feb 2025CRLA/270/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Convict under Section 452 IPC sought suspension of sentence pending appeal after acquittal on graver charges. The court noted over six months served, prior bail never misused, and delay in hearing, and suspended the remaining sentence subject to bail bonds before the Chief Judicial Magistrate.

What did the court decide?

Remaining sentence suspended subject to furnishing bail bonds and surety bonds to the satisfaction of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Pilibhit.

Azeem Khan vs State of U.P. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2025)

¶1

Court No. - 77

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 270 of 2025

¶3

Appellant :- Azeem Khan Respondent :- State of U.P. Counsel for Appellant :- Archana Tiwari,Atul Pandey Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Manoj Bajaj,J.

¶5

(Order on appeal)

¶6

List this appeal in due course.

¶7

(Order on Suspension of Sentence Application)

¶8

Applicant-Appellant, namely, Azeem Khan has applied for suspension of sentence during pendency of the appeal, arising against the judgment of conviction dated 18.12.2024 and order of sentence dated 20.12.2024 passed by Additional District & Session Judge, (Rape and P.O.C.S.O. Act, court no.1) Pilibhit in Special Sessions Trial No.96 of 2019, titled State of U.P. Vs. Azeem Khan, thereby convicting the appellant under Section 452 I.P.C, followed by imposition of sentence of five years imprisonment U/s 452 IPC with fine of Rs.25,000/- with further condition that in the event of non- deposit of fine, convict shall undergo further imprisonment of three months imprisonment

¶9

The applicant-convict was prosecuted through Case Crime No.180 of 2019, under Sections 452, 376, 506 IPC and 3/4 P.O.C.S.O. Act, 3(2)(v) S.C./S.T. Act, registered at Police Station- Madhotanda, District- Pilibhit.

¶10

Learned counsel for applicant submits that the trial court has overlooked the material discrepancies in the prosecution case while passing the impugned judgment of conviction dated

¶11

18.12.2024. Learned counsel submits that the prosecution case for alleged commission of offence punishable under Sections 376, 506 IPC, 3/4 POCSO Act and Section 3(2)(5) SC/ST Act failed and for the said offences the applicant has been acquitted. He submits that the applicant has been convicted only for commission of offence punishable under Section 452 IPC and the sentence of five years imposed upon the applicant is on higher side. He submits that out of the total sentence of five years imposed upon the applicant, a period of more than six months has already been undergone by the applicant and in this regard, he has produced the photostat copy of custody certificate of the applicant issued by Jail Superintendent, Pilibhit. According to learned counsel, during trial, the applicantaccused was extended the concession of regular bail, who stood the trial and never misused the concession. Learned counsel submits that the appeal is likely to succeed on the basis of the grounds pleaded and prays for suspension of sentence during the pendency of the appeal.

¶12

While opposing the above prayer, learned A.G.A. has argued that the prosecution adduced convincing evidence to bring home the guilt of the convict and the judgment of conviction dated 18.12.2024 is based upon correct appreciation of material on record. However, it is not disputed by learned A.G.A. that the applicant has at least already undergone a period of more than six months in custody against the substantive sentence of five years.

¶13

Upon hearing the learned counsel for the parties and considering their submissions, this Court finds that convict stood the trial and never misused the concession of bail. That apart, after the judgment of conviction dated 18.12.2024, applicant has been sent in custody to serve the sentence, but in the considered opinion of

¶14

this Court, the appeal is not likely to get mature for final hearing in near future. Applicant has already undergone a period of more than six months in custody out of total awarded sentence of five years. Therefore, further detention of the applicant behind the bars would not serve any useful purpose, and in case, the sentence is not suspended, the appeal may be rendered infructuous.

¶15

Resultantly, without meaning any expression of opinion on the merits of the appeal, the remaining sentence of the applicantappellant is suspended, subject to his furnishing the requisite bail bonds and surety bonds to the satisfaction of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Pilibhit.

¶16

The application is allowed.

¶17

Order Date :- 18.3.2025 Raj

¶18

Digitally signed by :- RAJ KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Azeem Khan v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Azeem Khan v. State of U.P.

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

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Imran Alias Batu vs State of U.P.

Janak Singh and 3 Others vs State of U.P.

Karan Alias Kendu vs State of U.P.

Babloo Singh and 5 Others vs Deputy Director of Consolidation Prayagraj Camp District Kaushambi and 7 Others

Pradeep vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Devendra Kumar Sharma and Another vs State of U.P. and 3 Others