Sarvindra and Another vs State of U.P.

Hon''ble Shri Kant Tripathi, J.—Counter affidavit filed on behalf of the State is taken on record.

Heard the learned counsel for the appellants and the learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the judgment and order dated 25.04.2011 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 4, Meerut in S.T. No. 240 of 2006 State Vs. Kiran and others.

Learned counsel for the appellants submitted that in the cross case a judgment of conviction has been passed. One person from the appellant side had also sustained injuries. It was further submitted that the appellants were on bail during the trial and never abused the same and are in jail from 25.04.2011. It was further contended that in case the appellants was not released on bail, the appeal would, in due course, become infructuous as there is no prospect of the appeal being heard in near future due to heavy dockets.

In my opinion, prima facie, the aforesaid submissions of the learned counsel for the applicants have substance, therefore, it is just and expedient to exercise the discretion in favour of the appellant.

Keeping in view the entire facts and circumstances of the case and submission of the learned counsel for the appellants and the learned A.G.A., the appellants Sarvindra and Ravindra, are released on bail in all the offences they have been convicted and sentenced in the aforesaid sessions trial, during the pendency of the appeal, on their furnishing a personal bonds and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned.

The realization of half of the fine shall remain stayed during pendency of the appeal, provided the appellants deposit half of the fine within one month.

On acceptance of bail bond and personal bond, the lower court shall transmit photostat copies thereof to this Court for being kept on the record of this appeal.

Let the paper books be prepared.

List the appeal for hearing in due course.