High CourtsSingle Bench

Harpal and Others vs State of U.P.

Allahabad High Court · Decided on 1 April 2011 · Citation: (2011) 04 AHC CK 0183

HON’BLE JUDGES
Naheed Ara Moonis, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Section 374 · Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Section 323, 34, 452
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
Criminal Appeal No. 1904 of 2011
Ask AI about this case

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

7 paragraphs · 383 words

Naheed Ara Moonis, J.—Heard learned Counsel for the Appellants and the learned AGA. Admit.

2.

Summon the lower court record.

3.

A prayer for bail has been made in this criminal appeal, which has been filed against a judgment and order dated 14.3.2011, passed by Additional Sessions/Special Judge(D.A.A. Act), Lalitpur, in Session Trial No. 52 of 2004, State of U.P. v. Harpal and Ors., arising out of case crime No. 60 of 2004, under Sections 323 read with Section 34, 452 IPC, P.S. Jakhalaun, District Lalitpur, convicting and sentencing the Appellants to undergo for one year rigorous imprisonment u/s 323/34 IPC and one year rigorous imprisonment u/s 452 IPC with a fine of Rs. 200/-each, with default stipulation.

4.

According to the prosecution case, the Appellants are said to have entered into the house of the complainant and assaulted the complainant and other persons, on account of which they had sustained injuries.

5.

It is contended by the learned Counsel for the Appellant that the trial court has convicted the Appellants for one year each u/s 452 and 323 read with Section 34 IPC. The Appellants were on bail during the trial and after conviction they are on interim bail. There is no likelihood of early hearing of appeal in near future, therefore the Appellants be released on bail during the pendency of appeal.

6.

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

7.

Having considered the submissions made by the learned Counsel for the Appellants 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 Appellants is allowed. Let the Appellants, Harpal, Emrat, Ram Charan and Badebhai alias Ram Avatar, convicted and sentenced in Session Trial No. 52 of 2004, State of U.P. v. Harpal and Ors., arising out of case crime No. 60 of 2004, under Sections 323 read with Section 34, 452 IPC, P.S. Jakhalaun, District Lalitpur, be released on bail on their furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned.