Court No. 20
Criminal Appeal No. 97 of 2010
Salim and 4 others .... Appellants
Versus
State of U.P. .... Opp. Party
Hon'ble Raj Mani Chauhan, J.
Heard learned counsel for the appellants, learned A.G.A on the
point of admission of criminal appeal and perused the judgment and
order of the trial court.
This criminal appeal has been filed by the accused-appellants
against the judgment and order dated 11.1.2010, passed by the learned
Additional District & Sessions Judge/FTC-4, Hardoi in Sessions Trial
No.655 of 2008 (Case Crime No. 263 of 2008); State Vs. Salim and
others, under Sections 147, 148, 307, 336, 332, 353, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C.
and Section 7 Criminal Law Amendment Act, Police Station
Tathiyawan, District Hardoi, whereby the learned Additional District &
Sessions Judge has held the accused-appellants guilty under Section 307,
147, 148, 332, 353, 336, 323, 506 I.P.C. and Section 7 Criminal Law
Amendment. Act, consequently, he has convicted and sentenced them to
undergo rigorous imprisonment for different terms of period of sentence
along with fine with default stipulated. The maximum sentence awarded
by the trial court is of five years under Section Section 307 I.P.C.
Admit.
Heard learned counsel for the accused appellants and learned
A.G.A. on the prayer for bail of the accused appellants.
The submission of the learned counsel for the accused appellants
is that as per prosecution case, the mob of about 50 persons who were
petty shop-keepers on foot-path had gone to police station to complain
against the constables who were demanding illegal money from them.
The mob became excited and threw bricks and stones pieces on the
police station causing injuries to Constables Ram Niwas, Mawa Ram
Chaudhary and S.I. Amit Pratap Singh. From a perusal of the injuries
sustained by these injured as mentioned in the impugned judgment, it
does not appear that any injured had sustained grievous hurt. Their
injuries were simple in nature. Therefore, no offence under Section 307
I.P.C. is made out against the accused appellants. The important fact is
that the Constable Ram Niwas who was one of the injured and main
prosecution witness in his cross examination could not identify the
accused who had thrown bricks and stones pieces on the police. The
way in which the prosecution story has been built up, the identity of the
accused has not been established by the prosecution even then the trial
court has convicted the accused appellants on imagination. The accused
appellants were on bail during trial and they did not misuse the liberty of
bail granted to them. Therefore, they deserve to be released on bail
during the pendency of the appeal.
Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail.
Considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the
appellant and the learned Additional Government Advocate. Keeping in
view the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case, without
expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the accused-appellants
may be released on bail.
Let appellants Salim, Gufran, Nijamuddeen, Navi Mohammad
and Furkan be released on bail in aforesaid Sessions Trial number during
pendency of the appeal on their 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
appellants, if not already deposited, within 30 days from the date of their
release, failing which this order of bail shall stand cancelled.
19.01.2010
Sanjay/-
