Yogesh Chandra Gupta, J. - (1.) SINCE both the appeals are arising out of one and the same judgment and order, bail applications moved therein are being decided by a common order. Heard learned Counsel for the Appellants, learned AGA for the State and perused the record.
(2.) HAVING been convicted and sentenced under Sections 364, 506 I.P.C. by the Additional Sessions Judge/Fast Track Court No. 30, Barabanki in S.T. No. 724 of 2004 (Crime No. 167 of 2003), Police Station -Ramsanehighat, District -Barabanki, Appellants -Hosila, Muneshwar, Lallan and Ashok have preferred these appeals and in appeals have also moved applications with the prayer to release them on bail during pendency of these appeals. It is contended on behalf of the Appellants that the Trial Court has based its judgment on the testimony of interested witnesses, namely, Nanhoo and Dhanpata who are the father and his daughter. No independent witness was examined by the prosecution. The statement of P.W. 1 - Nanhoo and P.W. 2 - Dhanpata are full of improbabilities and contradictions but the Trial Court has failed to take notice of it and has convicted the Appellants erroneously without there being any reliable and sufficient evidence. It is further contended that Smt. Dhanpata is the wife of Appellant Hosila with whom he is not having good relations and between both of them civil litigation is going on and it is for this reason Appellant Hosila, along with his uncles Muneshwar and Lallan has been falsely implicated in the case. It is further contended that the Appellant Kallu is a poor driver. He could not provide his services to the police personnel. Appellant -Ashok made a complaint against constable Devmani who was posted at police station -Tiket Nagar. Both Kallu and Ashok have been dragged into the matter for the aforesaid reasons. It is contended that Appellants were on bail during trial and the liberty so granted to them was not misused by them and at present are in jail for sufficient time after conviction. The appeal is not likely to be heard in near future, therefore, in the facts and circumstances, the Appellants are entitled to be released on bail during the pendency of the appeals. Learned AGA opposed the bail application.
(3.) CONSIDERING the facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I find it a fit case to release the Appellants on bail.;