Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

SIYA RAM & OTHERS versus STATE OF U.P.

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Siya Ram & Others v. State Of U.P. - CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 3854 of 2006 [2006] RD-AH 11816 (19 July 2006)

 

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 OF ALLAHABAD

Hon'ble Mukteshwar Prasad, J.

Hon'ble Vinod Prasad, J.

We have heard learned counsel for the appellants and learned A.G.A. for the State. We have gone through the impugned judgment also.

Admit.

Office is directed to summon the trial court record within a period of six weeks.

It is contended on behalf of the appellants that as per prosecution version appellant no. 1 (Siya Ram) was armed with a licensed gun and appellants no.2 and 3 (Sukhbir and Ram Naresh) were having country made pistols. However, in the FIR only Siya Ram was alleged to have fired at the deceased on his forehead. It is also contended that there was a cross case registered as S.T. no. 47 of 2001 in which one Chanda Singh was killed and six persons, including three women sustained grievous injuries. In cross case also, the accused were convicted by the court below. It is also contended that the prosecution totally failed to furnish any explanation for the injuries and death of Chanda Singh. It is also urged that no specific role has been assigned to appellants no.2 and 3 in the FIR.  

On the other hand, learned A.G.A. has submitted that all the three appellants took active part in the crime and there were three wounds of entry on the body of the deceased.

We have considered the submissions made on behalf of the parties. We have gone through the judgment in question carefully. In view of the role played by the appellants in the crime and cross case, we are inclined to release all the three appellants on bail during pendency of appeal.

Let the appellants- Siya Ram, Sukhbir and Ram Naresh 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., Mainpuri in S.T. No. 46 of 2001 State Vs. Siya Ram and others provided the appellants deposit a sum of Rs.3000/- as fine in the court below within a period of one month from today. The recovery of remaining amount of fine shall remain stayed during pendency of appeal.

The Chief Judicial Magistrate will send photocopies of the bail bonds to this Court immediately after its acceptance.

19.7.2006

OP/3854/06


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.