SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Sonu vs State Of U.P. on 2 May, 2019

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

?Court No. – 80

Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. – 5654 of 2018

Appellant :- Sonu

Respondent :- State Of U.P.

Counsel for Appellant :- Pradeep Chauhan

Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

Hon’ble Pradeep Kumar Srivastava,J.

Heard learned counsel for the accused-appellant and learned A.G.A. for the State on bail application. Perused the record.

By the judgement and order dated 12.9.2018 passed by learned Special Judge (POCSO Act)/VIIIth Additional Sessions Judge, Ramabai Nagar,(Kanpur Dehat), the accused-appellant has been convicted in S.T. No. Special ST. No. 113 of 2014, arising out of Case Crime No. 214 of 2014, P.S. Rasoolabad, District Kanpur Dehat and sentenced for the offence under Sectionsection 354 IPC read with section 42 of POCSO Act and Section 8 of POCSO Act, for five years rigorous imprisonment and fine of Rs.10,000/-, for the offence under Sectionsection 452 IPC, for five years rigorous imprisonment and fine of Rs.5,000/- and for the offence under Sectionsection 506 IPC, for one year rigorous imprisonment and fine of Rs.2,000/-.

Submission of learned counsel for the accused-appellants is that the accused-appellant has been falsely implicated in this case as the prosecution has fully failed to prove its case against accused-appellant. The accused-appellant was on bail during trial and he did not misuse the liberty of bail. The accused-appellant is in jail since 12.9.2018. He undertakes that he will not misuse the liberty of bail, if granted.

Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer of bail and submitted that learned trial court has rightly convicted and sentenced the accused appellant after appreciating evidence on record.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and that there is no chance of early hearing of this appeal, without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, I find it to be a case for bail during pendency of appeal.

Let the appellant-Sonu convicted in S.T. No. 113 of 2014, arising out of Case Crime No. 214 of 2014, under Sectionsections 354 IPC, read with section 42 of POCSO Act, 2012 and Section 8 of POCSO Act, Sections 452 and Section506 IPC, P.S. Rasoolabad, District Kanpur Dehat, be released on bail during pendency of appeal on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned.

So far as sentence of fine is concerned, on depositing 50% of fine, the remaining fine shall remain stayed during pendency of appeal. 50% fine shall be deposited within a month from receipt of this order.

As soon as personal bond and sureties are furnished, after keeping photostat copies of the same, original copies are directed to be transmitted to this Court forthwith from the trial court.

List the appeal for hearing in due course.

Order Date :- 2.5.2019

RCT/-

 

 

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Copyright © 2021 SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation
×

Free Legal Help, Just WhatsApp Away

MyNation HELP line

We are Not Lawyers, but No Lawyer will give you Advice like We do

Please read Group Rules – CLICK HERE, If You agree then Please Register CLICK HERE and after registration  JOIN WELCOME GROUP HERE

We handle Women Centric biased laws like False Sectioin 498A IPC, Domestic Violence(DV ACT), Divorce, Maintenance, Alimony, Child Custody, HMA 24, 125 CrPc, 307, 312, 313, 323, 354, 376, 377, 406, 420, 497, 506, 509; TEP, RTI and many more…

MyNation FoundationMyNation FoundationMyNation Foundation