Ghan Shyem vs State of U.P.

S.N. Sexena, J.—Heard the learned counsel for the Appellants and the learned A.G.A.

The Appellants was convioted and sentenced u/s 302 IPC to undergo imprisonment for life and he was also convicted and sentenced for some other offences as well for different periods on 31-3-1982. He thereafter, preferred an appeal before this Court aal challenged his said convie ion and sentences which was admitted by this Court on 1-6-192. Hi i application for release on bail was rejected on 5-10-82. He since then is behind the bars and the appeal unfortunately is pending decision before this Court and may take a few years more. The Appellants, therefore, has moved the present bail application which is his second bail application for release on bailon the sole ground of delay in the decision of his �appeal, tie, 1 already, has under-gone imprisonment for about 12 years.

The prayer for his release on bail has been opposed. Learned counsel for the Appellants has relied upon a decision of Hon''ble Supreme Court. Babu Singh and Others Vs. State of U.P., , to support his argument; that the Appellants due to inordinate delay in the decision of this- appeal was entitled for release on bail. After going through the said decision of �the Hon''ble Supreme Court, I am of the opinion that his prayer for release on bail is reasonable and liable to be allowed.

Learned counsel for the Appellants has relied upon another decision of the Hon''ble Supreme Court Kashmira Singh Vs. The State of Punjab, , which also supported his contention that due to inordinate delay in the decision of his appeal, the Appellants was entitled for release, on (sic) would.be useful to reproduce. the following observations of the Hon''ble Supreme. Court from the afroesaid Kashimira Singh''s case.

Would it be just at all for the Court to tell a person: We have ''admitted your appeal because we think you have a prima facie case; but. unfortunately we have no time to hear your appeal and you must remain m jail even though you may be innocent? What confidence wou|d such administration of Justice inspire in the mind of the public?

In view of the above discussion, the bail application is (sic) be allowed.

The bail application is allowed subject to the Appellants furnishing a personal bond and two sureties all -in the like amount, to the.satisfaction of the G J. M. Jhansi�