Keshanpal Pasi vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko.

Court No. - 9

Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 887 of 2024

Appellant :- Keshanpal Pasi Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Of Home Lko. Counsel for Appellant :- Rajendra Singh,Ravi Kant Pandey,Vimal Yadav Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Mrs. Sangeeta Chandra,J. Hon'ble Ajai Kumar Srivastava-I,J.

¶5

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

¶6

1. Heard learned counsel for appellant/ applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material available on record.

¶7

2. The first bail application preferred by the applicant/ appellant, namely, Keshanpal Pasi, who has been convicted and sentenced to undergo life imprisonment in Sessions Trial No.02 of 2019, arising out of Case Crime No.386 of 2018, under Sections 302/34 and 307/34 I.P.C. Police StationBihar, District Unnao.

¶8

3. Learned counsel for the applicant/ appellant has submitted that the applicant/ appellant is innocent, who has been falsely implicated in this case because of prior enmity between the parties and he has been convicted in this case against the weight of evidence.

¶9

4. His next submission is that the appellant/ applicant was not named in the first information report. The co-accused, Amarpal Pasi, who is stated to be armed with a knife, has already died

¶10

during trial. He has also drawn attention of this Court to the fact that P.W.-1, Ankit, who is stated to be an eye-witness of this incident, has turned hostile and has not supported the prosecution case as contained in Ext. Ka-1. The other witness of fact, P.W.-2 is not an eye-witness of the alleged incident.

¶11

5. His further submission is that as the sole prosecution witness, P.W.-1, Ankit has turned hostile, the conviction of the appellant recorded on the basis of testimony of P.W.-1 is patently illegal and unsustainable. He has also drawn attention of this Court to the post-mortem report of the deceased wherein various incised wounds are reported on the body of the deceased, and on the basis thereof, he submits that there is no such apparent injury which could have been inflicted by using a lathi. The laceration reported in the lungs is possible to be sustained due to fall of the deceased on the ground after sustaining injuries.

¶12

6 . His further submission is that the applicant/ appellant is languishing in jail since 12.02.2024, who has no previous criminal history. The applicant/ appellant was on bail during trial and he did not misuse the liberty of bail granted to him during trial.

¶13

7. Learned counsel for the appellant/ applicant has concluded his submission by submitting that, in case, the accused appellant/ applicant is enlarged on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail and

¶14

he shall also fully cooperate with the Court in getting the present criminal appeal concluded expeditiously.

¶15

8. Learned A.G.A. for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the accused-appellant/ applicant by submitting that the appellant came to be convicted on the basis of cogent and reliable testimony of prosecution witnesses. Therefore, he is not entitled to be enlarged on bail. However, she has been unable to dispute the other factual submissions advanced by learned counsel for the appellant/ applicant.

¶16

9. Having heard the learned counsel for the appellant/ applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and upon perusal of record, it transpires that in the written report, Ext. Ka-1, the appellant/ applicant was not named. The co-accused, Amarpal Pasi, who was assigned the role of inflicting injuries on the person of the deceased by using a knife, has already died. P.W.-1, has turned hostile, who has not supported the prosecution case. The applicant/ appellant is languishing in jail since 12.02.2024, who has no previous criminal history. The applicant/ appellant was on bail during trial and he did not misuse the liberty of bail granted to him during trial. There is no likelihood of the appeal being heard in the near future as the paper book in this case is not ready.

¶17

10. Thus, having regard to overall facts and circumstances of this case and also keeping in

¶18

view the arguments advanced on behalf of the parties and without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, a case for bail is made out. The application for suspension of sentence is, thus, allowed.

¶19

11. Accordingly, let the applicant/ appellant, Keshanpal Pasi be released on bail during pendency of this appeal on his furnishing personal bonds and two sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned.

¶20

12. 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.

¶21

13. It is made clear that during bail, the accusedappellant/ applicant shall not indulge himself in any criminal activity. If he is found to have indulged in any criminal activity, the prosecution shall be at liberty to file an application for cancellation of bail.

¶22

14. The entire fine imposed by the learned trial Court shall be deposited by the appellant/ applicant within a period of three months from the date of his release from jail concerned, failing which, the bail granted to the appellant/ applicant shall stand cancelled and he shall be arrested and sent to jail to serve out the sentence.

¶23

(Order on Appeal)

¶24

15. Office is directed to prepare the typed paper book in this case and provide a copy of the same to learned counsel for the parties as per rules of the Court.

¶25

16. List this appeal after ten weeks.

¶26

17. If any bail applications are pending in the connected appeals, the same can be heard in the interregnum as and when listed.

¶27

(A.K. Srivastava-I, J.) (Sangeeta Chandra, J.)

¶28

Order Date :- 3.1.2025 Mahesh

¶29

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

Keshanpal Pasi v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Keshanpal Pasi v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home 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

Smt. Rashipati vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Dal Singar Singh vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Kallu Rawat and Another vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Qadeer Ahmad and Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Deptt. Civil Sectt. Lko. and Others

Ram Gopal vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko

Munne @ Janardan Singh vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.