High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Case Law Search
Pappu And Another v. State Of U.P. - CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 2794 of 2006  RD-AH 9902 (19 May 2006)
Hon'ble Mukteshwar Prasad, J.
Hon'ble Vinod Prasad, J.
Office is directed to summon the record within four weeks.
The prayer for bail of appellant no. 2 (Baladeen) shall be considered after receipt of record.
We have heard learned counsel for the appellants and learned A.G.A. for the State. We have gone through the impugned judgment also.
It is contended that the appellants are son and father respectively. No specific role has been assigned to appellant no.1 and father is said to have committed the alleged murder with his licensed gun. He was on bail during trial and he did not misuse the liberty allowed to him. It is also urged that the chances of early hearing of appeal are very dim.
On the other hand, learned A.G.A. has not disputed the aforesaid facts.
In view of the submissions made on behalf of the parties and the role-played by appellant no. 1 in crime, we find it appropriate to enlarge appellant no. 1 (Pappu) on bail during pendency of appeal.
Let the appellant no. 1 (Pappu) 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., Shahjahanpur in S.T. No. 843 of 1999 State Vs. Baladeen and another provided the appellant deposits the entire amount of fine in the court below within a period of one month from today.
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.