High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Case Law Search
Raj Kumar & Another v. State Of U.P. - CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 7376 of 2006  RD-AH 20486 (4 December 2006)
Hon'ble Mukteshwar Prasad, J.
Hon'ble Vijay Kumar Verma, J.
We have heard learned counsel for the appellants and learned A.G.A. for the State. We have perused the judgment in question also.
Connect this appeal with Criminal Appeal No. 7238/06 filed by co-accused Sanjay.
Office is directed to summon the trial court record within a period of eight weeks.
List immediately thereafter for consideration of bail prayer of appellants-Raj Kumar and Chhangi.
Accused Sanjay has been convicted by the trial court under Section 363 I.P.C. read with Section 34 I.P.C. He was not found guilty under Sections 366 and 376 I.P.C. He has been sentenced to suffer R.I. for a period of five years only under Section 363 I.P.C. and to pay a fine of Rs.3,000/- only. He was on bail during trial and did not misuse the liberty of bail.
After having considered the accusation levelled against him and the role assigned to him in the crime, we find it appropriate to enlarge the appellant (Sanjay @ Sanju) on bail during pendency of the appeal.
Let the appellant-Sanjay @ Sanju be enlarged on bail during pendency of appeal on his executing a personal bond and furnishing bonds of two sureties, each in the like amount to the satisfaction of C.J.M., Aligarh in S.T. No. 97 of 2002 State Vs. Raj Kumar and others.
The appellant (Sanjay @ Sanju) is allowed one month time from today to deposit the entire amount of fine in the court below.
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.