Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

MUKESH KUMAR & OTHERS versus STATE OF U.P.

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Mukesh Kumar & Others v. State Of U.P. - CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 4609 of 2007 [2007] RD-AH 14696 (30 August 2007)

This is an UNCERTIFIED copy for information/reference. For authentic copy please refer to certified copy only. In case of any mistake, please bring it to the notice of Joint Registrar(Copying).

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

Court No. 44

Criminal Appeal No. 4609 of 2007

1. Mukesh Kumar

2. Neetu

3. Jagdish ..............Appellants

Versus

State of U.P. .............Opp. Party

----------

Hon'ble Imtiyaz Murtaza, J.

Hon'ble K.N. Ojha, J.

The objections filed today by learned A.G.A. is placed on the record.

Prayer for bail has been made on behalf of the appellants, who have been convicted for life imprisonment under Section 302/34 I.P.C. and a fine of Rs. 5000/- each and they have been further convicted under Section 201 I.P.C. and sentenced for 7 years imprisonment and fine of Rs. 2000/- each vide judgment and order dated 3.7.2007 passed by Additional District & Sessions Judge/Fast Track Court No. 1, Hathras in S.T. No. 216 of 2004.

Heard learned counsel for the appellants and learned A.G.A. for the State.

It is submitted by learned counsel for the appellants that there is no direct evidence against the appellants to connect them with the crime. The only evidence collected against the appellants is of last seen and recovery of a saw on the pointing out of appellant Neetu but the trial court did not believe the recovery of saw and acquitted the appellant Neetu under Section 4/25 Arms Act. Thus, the only evidence remains against the appellants is of last seen which has not been supported by any reliable and ocular witnesses.

Perused the lower court record as well as the order of Sessions Judge.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the fact that the appellants were on bail during the trial and they did not misuse the liberty, in our opinion, the appellants are entitled to bail.

Pending appeal the appellants Mukesh Kumar, Neetu and Jagdish convicted in S.T. No. 216 of 2004 shall be released on bail on their each executing a personal bond and on furnishing two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned.

Realisation of fine shall also remain stayed till further orders.

Dated : 30.8.2007

S.B.


Copyright

Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites

Advertisement

dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.