High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Case Law Search
Tara Chandra & Another v. State Of U.P. - CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 2628 of 2006  RD-AH 9437 (11 May 2006)
Hon'ble Mukteshwar Prasad, J.
Hon'ble Vinod Prasad, J.
Office is directed to summon the record within four weeks.
We have heard learned counsel for the appellants and learned A.G.A. for the State. We have gone through the impugned judgment as well as lower court record also.
It is contended that there is no direct evidence against the appellants and the case of the prosecution rests on circumstantial evidence. The prosecution tried to establish its case by the evidence of last seen through P.W. 3 Uma Shankar who is said to be inimical to the appellants. The first two witnesses examined on behalf of the prosecution did not help it and there is nothing on record to connect the appellants with the crime in question. Both the appellants were on bail in the court below and there is no material on record to show that they have misused the liberty allowed to them. It is also urged that this appeal is not likely to be heard in near future and the appeals of 1982-83 are being listed for hearing.
For the reasons stated above, we find it appropriate to enlarge the appellants on bail.
Let the appellants--Tara Chand and Mahendra Pal be enlarged on bail during pendency of appeal on their executing a personal bond and furnishing two sureties, each in the like amount to the satisfaction of C.J.M., Bareilly in S.T. No. 502 of 2003 State Vs. Tara Chand and another provided the appellants deposit a sum of Rs.5000/- as fine in the court below within a period of one month today. The recovery of remaining amount of fine shall remain stayed.
The Chief Judicial Magistrate will send photocopies of the bail bonds to the Court immediately.
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.