High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Case Law Search
Brijlal & Another v. State Of U.P. - CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 118 of 2007  RD-AH 8619 (8 May 2007)
Court No. 44
Criminal Appeal No. 118 of 2007
2. Santosh ..... Appellants
State of U.P. ......Opp. Party
Hon'ble Imtiyaz Murtaza, J.
Hon'ble Shiv Charan, J.
The appellants have prayed for suspending their conviction and sentence awarded by the trial court in S.T. No. 210 of 2004 (State Vs. Brijlal and others) under Sections 304/34 I.P.C. and sentenced to imprisonment for life and a fine of Rs. 10,000/-. They are further convicted under Section 308/34 I.P.C. and sentenced them to imprisonment for 5 years and a fine of Rs. 5,000/-.
We have heard learned counsel for the appellants, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the lower court record as well as the order of Sessions Judge.
Briefly stated, the prosecution case is that Ghanshyam Maurya lodged a report at the police station on 5.8.2004 that at 3.45 P.M. Kanhaiya Lal, had gone to the house of Brijlal and demanded the Tractor. Brijlal, Santosh, Rajesh, Hira Lal Maurya and Smt. Kanchan Devi started assaulting Kanhaiya Lal with Lathi, Danda, Gandasa and Barchha. On the alarm raised by Kanhaiya Lal Bharat Lal and Nand Lal also reached to save Kanhaiya Lal but they have also been assaulted. The occurrence was witnessed by Hukum Chand, Biskut and Pappu Harijan. Nand Lal succumbed to his injuries and Bharat Lal was admitted to the hospital in serious condition. During the treatment Bharat Lal also succumbed to his injuries.
Learned counsel for the appellants submits that that appellants have falsely been implicated in this case and it was further submitted that other co-accused had already acquitted by the trial court.
Learned A.G.A. submits that occurrence took place in broad day light. Two persons are killed. Their medical and post mortem examination reports corroborate the eye witness account. The deceased and appellant are closely related.
Connect with Crl. Revision No. 684 of 2007.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and gravity of offence, in our opinion, it is not a fit case for grant of bail to the appellants.
Accordingly the prayer for bail of the appellants is rejected.
Dated : 8.5.2007
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.