High Courts

Vijai vs State of U.P.

Allahabad High Court · Decided on 8 July 2011 · Citation: (2011) 07 AHC CK 0151

HON’BLE JUDGES
Imtiyaz Murtaza, J and Shyam Shankar Tiwari, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Section 374, 389 · Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Section 147, 148, 149, 302, 307
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
Criminal Appeal No. 6449 of 2010
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

8 paragraphs · 380 words

Shyam Shankar Tiwari, J.—This appeal has come up before us for consideration of prayer for bail of the appellant who has been convicted by Addl. Sessions Judge Court No. 4 Moradabad i S.T. No. 593 of 2006 under sections 302/149, 307/149, 323/149, 147 and 148 I.P.C. and sentenced to life imprisonment and fine of Rs. 25,000/, seven years imprisonment and fine of Rs. 7000/, six months imprisonment and fine of Rs. 500/, one years imprisonment and fine of Rs. 1000/ and two years imprisonment and fine of Rs. 2000/ respectively with default stipulation.

2.

Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned A.G.A., complainant''s counsel Shri O.P. Mishra and perused the lower court''s record.

3.

According to the prosecution case appellant Vijay was armed with fire arm, Atar Singh alias Bhoora, Raju alias Rajeev, Babloo, Omkar alias Dhautali, Jeevan, Mayaram, Vishesh alias Vijay Kumar, Vijay were armed with Lathi, Tabal and Kassi. Appellant Om Pal is alleged to be armed with knife. All the accused persons assaulted the deceased and injured with their respective weapons.

4.

It is submitted by learned counsel for the appellant that the Sessions Judge has wrongly convicted the appellant with the aid of section 149 I.P.C. All the injuries received by the injured persons are simple in nature and most of the injuries are on non vital part. So far as appellant Vijay is concerned he is said to have fired but no one has received any fire arm injury. Further it is argued that the appellant did not cause any injury to the deceased or injured.

5.

Per contra, learned A.G.A. opposing the prayer for bail of the appellant submitted that the occurrence took place in a broad day light and there are sufficient evidence against the appellant.

6.

Considering the respective submissions of learned counsel for the parties, facts and circumstances of the case and without commenting upon the merits of the case, in our opinion appellant is entitled to be released on bail.

7.

Pending appeal appellant Vijai convicted in S.T. No. 593 of 2006 be released on bail on his executing a personal bond and on furnishing two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned.

8.

Till further orders realization of fine shall also remain stayed.