Court No. 20
Criminal Appeal No. 1755 of 2010
Tauheed Ahmad & Others ......... Appellans
Versus
The State of U.P. ........ Opposite Party
Hon'ble Raj Mani Chauhan, J.
Heard learned counsel for the appellants on the point of admission
and perused the impugned judgment and order.
This criminal appeal has been filed by the accused-appellants against
the judgment and order dated 20.5.2010, passed by the learned Additional
Sessions Judge/Special Judge, S.C./S.T. (Prevention of Atrocity) Act, Court
No. 8, Sultanpur in Sessions Trial No. 451/2005 (crime no. 640/2004); State
Versus Tauheed Ahmad & Others under Sections 323/316 IPC, Police Station
Bazar Shukla, District Sultanpur, whereby the learned Additional Sessions
Judge has held the accused-appellants guilty under Sections 316/34 IPC and
has convicted and sentenced each of them to undergo rigorous imprisonment
for a period of 4 years under Section 316/34 IPC and to pay a fine of Rs.
10000/- with default stipulation.
Admit.
Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned A.G.A on the prayer
for bail and perused the judgment and order of the trial court.
The submission of learned counsel for the accused appellant is that as
per statement of the Dr. P.K. Srivastava who had examined the injured, no
visible injury was found on the person of the injured; rather the injured was
complaining pain on the lower part of her abdomen. Learned counsel
contends that as per medical opinion of the Doctor, the injured was pregnant
by 32 weeks. The injured was at the mature stage of her delivery. The injured
suffered miscarriage not on account of injury but on account of other
reasons. The maximum sentence awarded by the trial court to the accused-
appellants is 4 years and they were on bail during trial and they did not mis-
use the liberty of bail granted to them during the trial. They, therefore,
deserve to be released on bail during pendency of appeal.
Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail.
Considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the appellants
and learned A.G.A. Keeping in view the totality of the facts and
circumstance of the case as well as the fact that the accused were on bail
during the trial and they did not misuse the liberty of bail granted to them,
therefore, without prejudice to the merits of the appeal, the accused-
appellants Tauheed Ahmad, Sayed Ali @ Sayeed Ahmad and Khan
Mohammad may be released on bail during the pendency of the appeal.
Let the appellants Tauheed Ahmad, Sayed Ali @ Sayeed Ahmad and
Khan Mohammad be released on bail in aforesaid Sessions Trial number
during pendency of the appeal on his furnishing a personal bond with two
sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the C.J.M. Concerned.
However, the fine is not stayed and the same be deposited by the
appellant, if not already deposited, within 60 days from their release, failing
which this order of bail shall stand cancelled.
24.6.2010
Santosh/-