High CourtsDivision Bench

Mool Chand Sharma and Others vs State of U.P.

Allahabad High Court · Decided on 21 July 2010 · Citation: (2010) 07 AHC CK 0073

HON’BLE JUDGES
S.C. Agarwal, J · Amar Saran, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Section 140, 148, 149, 302
CASE NUMBER
Criminal Appeal No. 6198 of 2009
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

10 paragraphs · 521 words
1.

Sri K.K. Dwivedi, learned Counsel prays for and is allowed to withdraw his vakalatnama on behalf of the Appellant - Mool Chand Sharma. Written objections filed by learned A.G.A. is taken on record.

2.

Since both the aforementioned criminal appeals arise out of a common judgment and order, the prayer for bail in both the appeals is being heard and disposed of by a common order.

3.

Heard Sri G.S. Hajela, holding brief of Sri Virendra Singh, learned Counsel for the Appellants, Sri Satish Trivedi, learned senior advocate assisted by Sri R.P. Dwivedi, learned Counsel for the complainant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the trial court judgment and record.

4.

It is argued by learned Counsel for the Appellants that as many as eight persons have been made accused in this case, out of whom Jagdish Sharma, Anil Sharma, Amit Sharma, Rahul Sharma, Mool Chand and Pankaj alias Bobby were convicted under Sections 148, 302/149 I.P.C. It is submitted that as a matter of fact the deceased Lalit Parashar committed suicide when he had gone to take back his wife from her sasural because the family members of his sasural did not want to let her go with her husband and falsely this case has been shown to be a murder case in which Pankaj alias Bobby fired at the deceased and the other accused are said to have caught hold of the deceased. On the other hand, learned Counsel for the complainant and learned A.G.A. submitted that the story of suicide is not correct because the deceased had suffered abrasions, which indicate that he was caught hold and manhandled before he was killed. They further submitted that Appellant Pankaj alias Bobby was not on bail during trial.

5.

However, at this stage, learned Counsel for the Appellants submitted that the other Appellants were on bail during trial and they never misused the liberty of bail.

6.

Having considered the submissions made by learned Counsel for the parties and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, we are of the opinion that the Appellant Pankaj alias Bobby has not made out a case for bail but the other Appellants may be released on bail.

7.

The prayer for bail of Appellant Pankaj alias Bobby is rejected.

8.

Let the Appellants Mool Chand Sharma, Jagdish Prasad Sharma, Rahul Sharma, Amit Sharma and Anil Sharma, convicted and sentenced in S.T. No. 419 of 2006 State v. Jagdish Prasad Sharma and Ors. arising out of case crime No. 105 of 2006 under Sections 148, 302/140 I.P.C., P.S. Tajganj, district Agra, be released on bail on their executing a personal bond and furnishing two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of court concerned on depositing the fine of Rs. 10,000/- ( ten thousand) each.

9.

The realization of remaining amount of fine imposed upon the Appellants shall remain stayed during the pendency of their appeal.

10.

The hearing of the appeal is expedited. Office to prepare paper book preferably within three months and to list the appeal for hearing thereafter before the appropriate Bench. Order Date: