Court No. - 25 Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 1163 of 2010 Petitioner :- Mohan Lal Respondent :- State Of U.P. Petitioner Counsel :- Nisra Ahmad,Amit Jaiswal,Brij Mohan Sahai,Udai Pratap Singh Respondent Counsel :- Govt. Advocate AND Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 1605 of 2010 Petitioner :- Munna & Ors. Respondent :- State Of U.P. Petitioner Counsel :- Amit Jaiswal,Nisar Ahmad,Udai Pratap Singh Respondent Counsel :- Govt. Advocate Hon'ble Abdul Mateen,J.
Hon’ble Yogendra Kumar Sangal,J.
Heard Sri U.P.Singh, learned counsel for the appellants and
learned A.G.A for the State and perused the record.
Since these two appeals have been preferred by the accused
persons who are four in number and are convict of S.T.No.568 of
2004 arising out of crime No. 73 of 2003 whereby they have been
convicted under Sections 302/34 IPC , P.S. Hariyanwa, district
Hardoi for maximum term of life imprisonment with fine.
Since these appeals arise out of the common judgment as such they
are being taken up together with respect to consideration of the
bail of the appellants in pending appeals.
As it comes out that an FIR was lodged against four persons ,
namely, Mohan Lal, Munna Lal, Lala Ram and Ram Gopal with
respect to commission of crime said to have been committed by
them on 1.6.2003 at about 7.30 P.M. where by Munna Lal, Lala
Ram , Ram Gopal on instigation and pointing out of Mohan Lal
fired upon Ram Vilas from their respective fire arms carried by
them who after receiving fire arm injury went to the house of one
Raghubir Dhobi and fell down there and died.
It has been stressed by learned counsel for appellants that even
charge sheet was filed against four appellants but later on three
more persons Vijendra alias Daku , Ram Charan and Chandra
Pal were summoned under section 319 Cr.P.C and to give them an
opportunity the three witnesses of fact that is P.W.1, P.W-2 and
P.W-3 whose examination in chief and cross examination was
already done were again summoned on the application so moved
by the public prosecutor as well as the three further added persons
and it is surprising that all the witnesses of fact turned hostile.
Stress has been laid by the learned counsel for appellants that
conviction is based upon no evidence since all the three witnesses
of fact have turned hostile and the three newly added persons
Vijendra , Ram Charan and Chandra Pal have been acquitted,
thus the case of the appellants is at least lies on better footings
than the persons who have been acquitted by the learned Sessions
Judge in the aforesaid Session Trial.
We have gone through the FIR, statement of the witnesses , post
mortem report of Ram Vilas and other relevant papers.
Since the role of instigation has been assigned to Mohan Lal as
such we find the case of Mohan Lal is distinguished from other
accused who have been assigned the role of firing on the
deceased. So far the matter with respect to the statement of
witnesses at the initial stage they in their examination in chief as
well as in cross examination have supported the prosecution story
but were declared hostile when they were summoned later with
respect to the proceedings initiated under section 319 Cr.P.C and
they were declared hostile.
Submission of the learned counsel for the appellants is that the
court had even not prosecuted P.W.1 to P.W.3 for giving false
evidence before the court and also since they have turned hostile
with respect to the statement which they had given earlier before
the court,it will be feasible, as we think just and proper at this
juncture to issue a direction to the learned Sessions Judge to take
appropriate action against P.W.1 to P.W.3 too of the aforesaid
session trial for giving false evidence before the court.
We while going through the evidence on record and the judgment
we find the case of Munna Lal , Lala Ram and Ram Gopal
appellants who have been assigned the role of firing not to be a fit
case for releasing them on bail.
The prayer for granting bail to appellants Munna Lal, Lala
Ram and Ram Gopal in pending appeals is refused.
So far appellant Mohan Lal is concerned, he has been assigned the
role of instigation and pointing out and he was on bail in the trial
court and as reported, has not misused the liberty of bail and his
appeal will take long time in reaching its justifiable conclusion, we
find the case of accused appellant Mohan Lal is a fit case for bail.
The bail prayer of accused appellant Mohan Lal is allowed.
Accordingly we direct that the convict Mohan Lal of the aforesaid
Session Trial and appellant of Crl.Appeal No. 1163 of 2010 be
released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two
sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court
concerned. Realization of half of fine is stayed. Remaining half of
fine shall be deposited by appellant Mohan Lal within one month
from the date of his release on bail. Copy of the bail bonds be
transmitted to this court to be preserved in the record of the appeal.
After the above order was dictated, the learned counsel for
appellants stated that the prayer of bail of appellants Munna Lal,
Lala Ram and Ram Gopal be dismissed as not pressed.
Accordingly the same is dismissed as not pressed.
Order Date :- 13.7.2010
R.P/