High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Case Law Search
Vichitra Kumar @ Lala v. State Of U.P. - CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 5627 of 2006  RD-AH 16661 (21 September 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 and perused the impugned judgment.
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. The prosecution examined P.W.2 Chov Singh, real brother of the deceased and one C.W.1 Bhagwan Singh to prove the prosecution case, who claimed to have seen the appellant along with one Pappu committing murder of the deceased (Lekhraj Singh). P.W.2 Chov Singh claimed to have seen the entire incident while returning to his village from Khair on a Tanga. According to him, the appellant and his associates were demanding money from the deceased for purchasing liquor and the deceased paid them Rs.20/-. They were insisting for more payment and on refusal, his brother was killed. It is further contended that the appellant was on bail in the court below and did not misuse the liberty of bail.
On the other hand, learned A.G.A. has submitted that the assailants were carrying lathies and Bankas and ante-mortem injuries were fully corroborated the prosecution version.
Taking into consideration the entire submissions made on behalf of the parties and the facts and circumstances of the case, we are inclined to release the appellant on bail during pendency of appeal.
Let the appellant-Vichitra Kumar @ Lala be enlarged on bail during pendency of appeal on his executing a personal bond and furnishing two bonds of sureties, each in the like amount to the satisfaction of C.J.M., Aligarh in S.T. No. 538 of 2002 State Vs. Vichitra Kumar.
The appellant is allowed two months time from today 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.