Ashok Kumar and Others vs State of U.P.

Naheed Ara Moonis, J.—Heard learned Counsel for the Appellant, Nankau and the learned AGA.

It is submitted by the learned Counsel for the Appellant that at the time of admission of this appeal, the co-Appellants, Ashok Kumar, Ashok and Ram Lakhan have been granted bail by the another bench of this Court vide order dated 25.9.2008 and prayer for bail of the Appellant was not considered at that time.

A prayer for bail has been made in this criminal appeal, which has been filed against a judgment and order dated 8.9.2008, passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 6, Allahabad, in Session Trial No. 95 of 2008, State of U.P. v. Ashok Kumar & three others, arising out of case crime No. 110 of 2007, under Sections 304(ii) read with Section 34, 323 read with Section 34 IPC, P.S. Mauaima, District Allahabad, convicting and sentencing the Appellant to undergo for seven years imprisonment u/s 304(ii) read with Section 34 IPC with a fine of Rs. 5,000/-, two years imprisonment u/s 324/34 IPC with a fine of Rs. 2,000/-, with default stipulation.

According to the prosecution case, the co-accused Ashok Kumar is said to have teased the complainant''s niece and when the complainant''s brother refrained him from doing so the co-accused Ashok Kumar, Ashok and Ram Lakhan along with the Appellant started assaulting to complainant''s brother with kicks-fists and lathi danda, resulting injuries to the complainant, his brother Sugreev and Bundal, father of the complainant. The complainant''s father is said to have died on account of some internal injuries, thereafter all of them ran away from the spot, threatening them of dire consequences. Initially the case was registered under Sections 304, 294, 323, 504, 506 IPC.

It is contended by the learned Counsel for the Appellant that the other accused persons who have been convicted under the aforesaid offences have already been granted bail by the another Bench of this Court. During the trial it has come that the Appellant had assaulted the deceased on account of which he died. The medical evidence is inconsistent with the prosecution case where four persons are said to have caused injuries to the deceased with lathi-danda. The medical report shows that there is contusion over his neck and the doctor has given his opinion that on account of pressure over the neck the deceased had died due to asphyxia.

It is further submitted that according to the first information report no specific role has been attributed to the Appellant for causing injuries to the deceased. The statement of the witnesses against the Appellant are unfounded. The Appellant is in jail since 2007 and there is no likelihood of early hearing of appeal in near future, therefore the Appellant be released on bail during the pendency of appeal.

Per contra, the learned AGA has opposed the prayer for bail of the Appellant and submitted that there is active participation of the Appellant, therefore he does not deserve to be released on bail.

Having considered the submissions made by the learned Counsel for the Appellant as well as the learned AGA and looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the prayer for bail of the Appellant, Nankau is allowed. Let the Appellant, Nankau, convicted and sentenced in Session Trial No. 95 of 2008, State of U.P. v. Ashok Kumar & three others, arising out of case crime No. 110 of 2007, under Sections 304(ii) read with Section 34, 323 read with Section 34 IPC, P.S. Mauaima, District Allahabad, 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.