Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DIGILAW 313 (ALL)

Diwakar Yadav v. State of U. P.

2025-02-11

SAUMITRA DAYAL SINGH, VINOD DIWAKAR

body2025
JUDGMENT : Saumitra Dayal Singh, Vinod Diwakar, JJ. 1. Heard Sri Aditya Prasad Mishra, learned counsel for the appellant in Criminal Appeal No.315 of 2023 (Diwakar Yadav Vs. State of U.P.) and Criminal Appeal No.9675 of 2022 (Pappu @ Gyan Singh Vs. State of U.P.), Mrs. Archna Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. 2. The present bail application has been filed on behalf of the appellants Diwakar Yadav and Pappu @ Gyan Singh with a prayer to suspend the sentence and to release them on bail in Sessions Trial No.434 of 2016 (State Vs. Diwakar Yadav and Another) arising out of Case Crime No. 382 of 2016, under Sections 302/34, 201 IP.C., Police Station Kalyanpur, District Fatehpur and the maximum sentence awarded to them is life imprisonment. 3. Submission is, the weak circumstantial evidence has been relied upon by the prosecution. In that regard, it has been submitted, last seen evidence is of 29.08.2016. The deceased remained missing since then and his dead body was discovered on the next date i.e. 30.08.2016 lying in an open field, yet, the FIR was lodged with delay on 31.08.2016. Besides the evidence of last seen, there is no credible recovery made to implicate the present appellants. Referring to the motive cited by the prosecution, it has been stated that is against the co-accused Ram Babu Vishwakarma alone. He has been acquitted. 4. In such circumstances, it has been stated, the appellants were on bail during trial. At present, they have remained confined for more than two years. 5. On the other hand, learned A.G.A. submits, evidence of last seen exists, therefore, no indulgence is warranted at this stage. 6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having perused the record, it is a case of circumstantial evidence only. In the entire facts and circumstances of the case noted above, the credibility of the circumstantial evidence has been seriously impeached that would require detailed consideration at the stage of hearing. Accordingly, the bail applications pressed on behalf of appellants Diwakar Yadav and Pappu @ Gyan Singh are allowed at this stage. 7. Let the appellants-Diwakar Yadav and Pappu @ Gyan Singh convicted and sentenced in above mentioned Sessions Trial be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs. Accordingly, the bail applications pressed on behalf of appellants Diwakar Yadav and Pappu @ Gyan Singh are allowed at this stage. 7. Let the appellants-Diwakar Yadav and Pappu @ Gyan Singh convicted and sentenced in above mentioned Sessions Trial be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 50,000/- (Fifty Thousand) and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned. 8. As soon as personal and surety bonds are furnished, photocopies of the same are directed to be transmitted to this Court forthwith by the concerned court to be kept on record. 9. Realization of 50% fine shall remain stayed during pendency of present appeal. Remaining 50% of fine shall be deposited by the appellants within a month of his release. Order on Appeal 10. Office is directed to prepare paper book. 11. List for hearing in due course.