Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2011 DIGILAW 2918 (ALL)

Ram Pher Singh & Ors. v. State of U. P.

2011-12-21

ABDUL MATEEN, V.K.DIXIT

body2011
Virendra Kumar Dixit, J.;- These two bail applications moved by the appellants/applicants relate to same crime and sessions trial numbers, therefore, the same are being disposed of by a common order. Heard learned counsel for the applicants/appellants and learned Additional Government Advocate on the application moved under Section 389 Cr.P.C. for the purpose of bail in pending appeal. This criminal appeal has been preferred by the appellants namely Ram Pher Singh, Bhupendra Pratap Singh and Shailendra Pratap Singh after having been convicted in Sessions Trial No.220 of 2003, under Sections 302/34, 307/34, 504, 506 IPC and sentenced for the maximum term of life imprisonment with fine stipulation vide judgment and order dated 18.10.2010 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Court No.3, District Sultanpur. We have gone through the judgment and record of lower court. The incident had taken place on 29.06.2003 at about 6.30 P.M. of which FIR was lodged on the same day. As per prosecution case due to irrigation of field the complainant's party of one side and accused party on the other side had free fight in which Main Bahadur Singh and Veer Bahadur Singh from the side of the prosecution had received injuries and Ajay Pratap Singh who also received injuries succumbed to the same. The accused-appellants Ram Pher Singh was armed with Knife whereas Bhupendra Pratap Singh and Shailendra Pratap Singh armed with Dhariya and lathi. It is a case of the prosecution from the FIR which was lodged by one Harihar Singh (P.W.1) is silent to the effect that they had also wielded lathi blows upon the side of the accused but as per Ext. Kha-1 and 2 the applicants/appellants Bhupendra Pratap Singh and Ram Pher Singh also received injuries on vital parts of the body. Cross FIRs were lodged by the side of the accused which resulted also in the submission of the charge-sheet and later on conviction of Main Bahadur Singh, Harihar Singh and Veer Bahadur Singh in Sessions Trial No. 322 of 2006 of which appeal has been preferred by them before this Court vide Criminal Appeal No. 2874 of 2010 which is pending and connected along with the present appeal. We have also seen the post-mortem report of the deceased-Ajay Pratap Singh who also received four injuries out of which injury No. 3 is incised wound over left side of lower chest, below left nipple measuring 3cm. We have also seen the post-mortem report of the deceased-Ajay Pratap Singh who also received four injuries out of which injury No. 3 is incised wound over left side of lower chest, below left nipple measuring 3cm. x 1 cm. cavity deep which ultimately as per opinion of the Doctor resulted into death of Ajay Pratap Singh. It comes out from the post-mortem report of the deceased that Bhupendra Pratap Singh used Dhariya which is a heavy sharp edged cutting weapons by inflicting injuries upon the deceased whereas Ram Pher Singh was armed with knife and Shailendra Pratap Singh armed with lathi. Great stress has been laid by the learned counsel for the appellants that since it is case of free fight in which even two of the appellants received injuries and since the prosecution right from the beginning is silent on this aspect which ought to have been explained by it firstly in the FIR but it is silent even no description of it has been found in the statements of the witnesses, as such, accused-appellants are entitled at least for bail. It has further been submitted that the appellants were on bail during the course of trial and they did not misuse the liberty of bail granted to them. It is also stated that the appeals are of the year 2010 and early disposal is the fundamental right of the appellants and there is no likelihood of the same being heard and decided in near future. Let the things be as they are, we find that appellant-Bhupendra Pratap Singh who had used Dhariya by inflicting injuries not only upon deceased but also upon Main Bahadur Singh and Veer Bahadur Singh, therefore, we do not find it a fit case for releasing him on bail. Accordingly, his prayer for bail is hereby refused. So far as the prayer for bail in respect of appellants, namely, Ram Pher Singh and Shailendra Pratap Singh are concerned, we hereby direct that appellants-Ram Pher Singh and Shailendra Pratap Singh convict of aforesaid Sessions Trial be enlarged on bail on their furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of Chief Judicial Magistrate concerned. Realization of half of the fine is stayed and remaining half of the fine shall be deposited by the appellant within one month from the date of their release on bail. Realization of half of the fine is stayed and remaining half of the fine shall be deposited by the appellant within one month from the date of their release on bail. Court below is further directed to transmit to this Court photocopies of bond and sureties filed by the appellants to be preserved in the record maintained in this Court.