High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Case Law Search
Rajvir v. State Of U.P. - CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 2260 of 2006  RD-AH 8897 (3 May 2006)
Court No. 21
Criminal Appeal No. 2260 of 2006
Rajvir Vs. State of U.P.
Hon'ble. Mukteshwar Prasad, J.
Hon'ble Vinod Prasad, J.
Connect it with Criminal Appeal No. 1840 of 2006.
Office is directed to summon the lower court within four weeks.
We have heard learned counsel for the appellant, on prayer for bail, learned A.G.A. and perused the impugned judgment.
It is contended by the learned counsel for the appellant that taking entire prosecution case to be correct, no offence under Section 304 I.P.C. is made out and no knowledge can be imputed to the appellant for causing death. He contended that the prosecution allegations is only this much that while seeing the Television the appellant pushed the deceased in the room and later on thinking him to be dead left his body near the railway track.
Taking the whole prosecution case into consideration, it cannot be said that the submission raised by the appellant at the bar is without any merit. It is further contended that the appellant was on bail during trial and he has not misused the bail and moreover the appeal is not likely to be heard in near future. At present, appeals of 1982-83 are being listed for hearing.
Learned A.G.A. also could not dispute the fact that the only allegation against the appellant is that he had pushed the deceased in the room
In this view of the matter, let the appellant-Rajvir be enlarged on bail during pendency of appeal on his executing a personal bond and furnishing two sureties, each in the like amount to the satisfaction of C.J.M., Mathura in S.T. No. 284 of 2003, State Vs. Munish Kumar and others.
The Chief Judicial Magistrate will send photocopies of the bail bonds to this Court immediately.
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.