Bankey Lal And 2 Ors. vs State of U.P.

R.M. Chauhan, J.

Heard learned counsel for the appellants, learned A.G.A on the prayer for bail and perused the judgment and order dated 30.03.2007.

1.This appeal has been directed by the accusedappellants Bankey Lal, Ratiram and Satiram against the judgment and order dated 30.03.2007 passed by Additional Sessions Judge/Fast Track Court no.2, Ambedkar Nagar, in Sessions Trial No.150 of 2001 (Crime No.38A of 2000) State Vs. Bankey Lal and two others, under Sections 304(2)/34 I.P.C, P.S. Alapur, District Ambedkar Nagar, whereby the learned Additional Sessions Judge has held the each accused guilty under Sections 304(2)/34 I.P.C. The learned Additional Sessions Judge has convicted and sentenced the each of the accusedappellant to undergo seven years rigorous imprisonment and to pay fine Rs.1,00,000/ each with default stipulation.

The submission of the learned counsel for the appellants is that as per prosecution case the accusedappellants on the night of occurrence took the deceased Mahendra to their house, where they badly beaten him. Thereafter they took him to the police station. Thereafter the deceased was taken to the hospital but while he was on the way he succumbed to his injuries. The learned counsel contends that no first information report had been lodged by the complainant Prabhawati, who is mother of the deceased after the occurrence. In fact, on the night of occurrence deceased had entered the house of accused Bankey Lal for committing theft. He was caught hold by the accused while he was escaping away. He was beaten by the accused as well as by villagers, who had gathered there. Accused Bankey Lal with the help of villagers took the deceased to the police station and lodged a first information report under Section 456 I.P.C. Hari Lal, P.W.4 who is the real uncle of the deceased has admitted this fact in his statement that on the night of occurrence the deceased had entered into the house of accused Bankey Lal to commit theft. He was beaten by the accused as well as by villagers. He has also admitted that the accused was a man of bad character. He was involved in committing theft and teasing the girls of the locality. No prosecution witness has stated that the deceased had died on account of injuries caused by the accused; rather he could die on account of injuries caused by villagers. The prosecution story as narrated by the complainant is totally false. The accused have already spent two years and nine months in jail while the maximum sentence awarded by the trial court is seven years under Section 304(2)/34 I.P.C. The learned counsel also requests for staying the realization of fine as the trial court without considering the facts and circumstances of the case has imposed exaggerated amount of fine. The accusedappellants were on bail during trial. They did not misuse the liberty of bail granted to them. Therefore, they deserve to be released on bail.

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

Considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the accused appellants and the learned A.G.A. Keeping in view the evidence led by the prosecution as well the facts and circumstances of the case without expressing any opinion on the merits of the appeal, the accusedappellants may be released on bail.

Let appellants Bankey Lal, Ratiram and Satiram be released on bail in aforesaid Sessions Trial number on their furnishing personal bonds with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned.

The realization of fine imposed by the trial court against the accused appellants will remain stayed till the disposal of the appeal.