Allahabad High Court High Court

Heera vs State Of U.P. on 22 January, 2010

Allahabad High Court
Heera vs State Of U.P. on 22 January, 2010
                                                                     Court No.20
                       Criminal Appeal No. 132 of 2010
                                      Heera

                                       Vs.
                                The State of U.P.
Hon'ble R.M. Chauhan, J.

Heard learned counsel for the appellant on the point of admission and

perused the judgment and order dated 14.1.2010 passed by the trial court.

This appeal has been filed by the accused-appellant, Heera against the

judgment and order dated 14.1.2010 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge

Court No.2, Pratapgarh, in Sessions Trial No.223 of 2002 (Crime No.6 of 2002)

State Vs. Heera and others, under Sections 304(II), 323 I.P.C., P.S. Jethwara,

District Pratapgarh, whereby the learned Additional Sessions Judge has held the

accused appellant guilty under Sections 323, 304(II) I.P.C. The learned Additional

Sessions Judge has convicted and sentenced the accused to undergo five years

rigorous imprisonment under Section 304(II) I.P.C.

Admit.

Heard the learned counsel for the appellant, learned A.G.A. on the prayer of

bail and perused the judgment and order dated 14.1.2010.

The learned counsel for the appellants contends that the deceased Ram

Dular is said to have been done to death by the accused-appellant giving lathi

blow. Dr. R.P. Chaubey P.W.1, who had conducted the autopsy examination of the

dead body of the deceased, has stated that he had found one lacerated wound on

the top of the head of the deceased but on internal examination no skull bone was

found to be fractured. He has opined that the cause of death of the deceased could

not be ascertained and viscera was preserved. Further he has stated that the

deceased had not died on account of injuries sustained by him. It has not been

established that the deceased had died on account of the injuries sustained by him
in the alleged occurrence. Therefore, it was a case of simple hurt. The learned

Additional Sessions Judge has wrongly held the accused guilty under Section

304(2) I.P.C. Accused, therefore, deserves to be released on bail.

The learned A.G.A, opposed the prayer of bail.

Considering the submissions of the learned counsel for the accused-

appellant and the learned A.G.A. Keeping in view the totality of the facts and

circumstances of the case as well as keeping in view the statement of Dr. R.P.

Chaubey, P.W.1, who had conducted the autopsy examination of the deceased,

without expressing any opinion on the merits of the appeal, the accused-appellants

may be released on bail.

Let appellant Heera be released on bail in aforesaid Sessions Trial number

on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount to the

satisfaction of the court concerned.

22.01.2010
Prajapati/-