AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
10 paragraphs · 288 wordsLeave granted.
We have heard learned counsel for the parties.
In the present appeal the order passed by the High Court rejecting the prayer for bail of the accused-appellant during the pendency of the criminal appeal has been assailed.
The accused-appellant who has been convicted under Sections 364, 302 and 201 of the Indian Penal Code had filed an appeal before the High Court of judicature at Allahabad in the year 2011. Notwithstanding the order of the High Court expediting the hearing of the appeal, the appeal continues to remain pending.
The accused-appellant in the meantime has been in custody for a period of about eleven years.
It is brought to our notice that the appeal is presently not in the hearing list of the High Court, although, it had so appeared in the months of May and July, 2019.
If the appeal is not in the hearing list of the High Court, the appeal will not be proceeded for hearing in the near future. Additionally, it is also noticed that the conduct of the accused-appellant while in jail is reportedly satisfactory.
Taking into account the period of custody suffered by the accused-appellant and the time likely to be taken by the High Court for disposing of the appeal, we are of the view that the accused-appellant should be released on bail to the satisfaction of the Additional Sessions Judge, Hapur, Ghaziabad, Uttar Pradesh in Sessions Case No.164 of 2009 (FIR No.429/2008). We order accordingly.
The learned trial Court is free to impose all such conditions as it may deem fit.
The order of the High Court is set aside and the appeal is allowed as indicated above.