High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Case Law Search
Chhote Singh v. State Of U.P. - CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 4522 of 2006  RD-AH 13385 (11 August 2006)
Hon'ble Mukteshwar Prasad, J.
Hon'ble K.N. Ojha, J.
We have heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned A.G.A. for the State. We have gone through the judgment under appeal.
Office is directed to summon the trial court record within a period of six weeks.
It is contended that the appellant was not named in the FIR. Co-accused disclosed his name to the I.O. He was, however, not put up for test identification and was identified for the first time in the court. He was allegedly carrying rifle at the time of incident but the doctor conducting autopsy found that single gun shot wound was caused by Tamancha. There is contradiction in the testimony of witness as to what weapon was being carried by the appellant.
On the other hand, learned A.G.A. has not disputed the aforesaid submission of appellant's learned counsel.
In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, we are inclined to release the appellant on bail during pendency of appeal.
Let the appellant-Chhote Singh 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., Hamirpur in S.T. No. 18 of 2003 State Vs. Manoj and others.
The appellant is allowed one-month time to deposit the entire amount of fine in the court below.
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.