- (1.) WE have heard Sri Uttar Kumar Goswami, Advocate in support of this appeal and the learned AGA.
(2.) THIS is a second bail application. The first bail application of the appellant, Veer Pal was rejected by another Bench of this Court vide order dated 17.11.2005. After rejection of the bail prayer, the appellant has remained in jail for nearly three and half years more. Learned counsel for the appellant contended that on the same evidence, lower appellate Court has acquitted one of the co-accused Ram Charan believing his alibi to be well founded and established. The submission raised by counsel for the appellant is that if in respect of one of the accused, whose role was identical with that of the appellant, the trial Judge disbelieved the prosecution witnesses, it is highly unsafe to rely upon those very prosecution witnesses to record a conviction against the appellant. Learned counsel for the appellant further submitted that once the alibi is established, applicability of Section 34, I.P.C. is also a dicey proposition and in any view of the matter the appeal is arguable and not likely to be heard in near future and since the appellant has already remained in jail more than three and half years, he should now be released on bail. Learned AGA on the contrary objected and contended that since earlier the appellant's bail prayer was refused by another Bench, therefore, the appellant should not be released on bail.
(3.) WITHOUT expressing any opinion on the merits of the matter but since we find that appeal is an arguable one and one of the accused has already been acquitted by the trial Judge believing his alibi and that the appellant has now been in jail for nearly three and half years, and that the appellant was on bail during the trial and he has not misused his liberty of bail granted to him earlier that we consider it appropriate to release the appellant on bail. Let the appellant Veer Pal involved in ST. No. 551/2001 (State v. Veer Pal), under Section 302/34, I.P.C. be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 1 lac and two solvent sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of trial Judge concerned on the following conditions: (1) That both the sureties will be his family relatives. (2) That the appellant shall not leave the district Budaun without intimation to the trial Judge.;