Court No. - 44 Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL U/S 374 CR.P.C. No. - 3789 of 2010 Petitioner :- Narendra Respondent :- State Of U.P. Petitioner Counsel :- J.K. Chaktraborty Respondent Counsel :- Govt. Advocate Hon'ble Imtiyaz Murtaza,J.
Hon’ble Mrs. Jayashree Tiwari,J.
Heard learned counsel for the appellant and the learned A.G.A. for the State
and perused the lower court’s record.
Prayer for bail has been filed on behalf of the appellant who has been
convicted by Additional Sessions Judge and District Judge/Special Judge,
E.C. Act in S.T. No. 221 of 2007, under Section 302/34 I.P.C. in crime no.
421/2006, Police Station Roza, District Shahjahanpur and sentenced him to
undergo life imprisonment with a fine of Rs. 10,000/- and in default of
payment of fine further two years simple imprisonment.
According to the prosecution case, the occurrence took place on 15.10.2006
when the informant along with his father, mother and brother were working in
the field. Sitaram was also working in the adjacent field and some discussions
took place. Sitaram went to the village and returned along with Narendra and
Vedram who were armed with latthi, danda and kasi and at 9:30 a.m., they
started assaulting them. Vedram and Pramod have assaulted his father on his
head. Narendra and Sitaram assaulted with latthi and danda on his brother.
When his mother tried to save his father, she was also assaulted. The
witnesses Rajaram and Ratiram who were working in neighbour’s field came
to rescue after hearing shrinks. His father received serious injuries. He was
taken to the District Hospital but in the way he died.
It is submitted by learned counsel for the appellant that the alleged offence is
not a pre-meditated offence. According to the prosecution case, the
occurrence took place on the basis of dispute regarding tress-passing of field.
The appellant was not armed with any lethal weapon. The deceased sustained
only one lacerated wound and it is not known who caused this injury. The
conviction of the appellant under Section 302/34 I.P.C. is not legally proper.
After the investigation chargesheet has been submitted against the accused
person and the Sessions Judge considering the evidence produced by the
prosecution convicted the appellant, as aforesaid.
On the contrary, learned A.G.A. opposing the prayer for bail submitted that
there are sufficient evidence against the appellant and Sessions Judge has
rightly convicted the appellant on the basis of evidence on record.
Considering the respective submissions of learned counsel for the parties,
facts and circumstances of the case and without commenting any opinion on
the merits of the case, in our opinion the appellant pending appeal is entitled
to be released on bail.
Pending appeal appellant Narendra convicted in S.T. No. 221 of 2007 shall be
released on bail on his executing a personal bond and on furnishing two
sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned.
Till further orders realization of fine shall also remain stayed.
Order Date :- 9.8.2010