State of U.P v. Bhanna

1. Heard Shri Pradeep Kumar Mishra, appellant/applicant as well as Ms. Meera Tripathi, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the materials available on record. learned counsel first bail application, moved on behalf of

2. This appellant/applicant- Bhanna @ Aziz, in the instant pending appeal. He has been convicted under Sections 498-A and 302 I.P.C. and sentenced for maximum term of life imprisonment under Section 302 I.P.C. with fine stipulations and default clause, vide judgment and order dated 15.12.2023 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, F.T.C. (O.A.W.), District Sitapur in Sessions Trial No. 986 of 2011(State of U.P. vs. Bhanna @ Aziz), arising out of Case Crime No. 158 of 2011, lodged at Police Station Mishrikh, District Sitapur.

3. Learned counsel for the appellant/applicant has pressed this bail application mainly on the ground that the present appellant is aged about 80 years, remained on bail during the course of trial, did not misuse the liberty of bail and he is in jail since 15.12.2023 i.e. about two years. Therefore, he may be given the benefit of the dictum rendered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Anil Ari vs. State of West Bengal, reported in 2009 (3) SCC (Cri) 1377, wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court granted bail to the appellant/applicant- Anil Ari considering his age, which was more than 70 years, the fact that he was on bail during trial and he is in jail for some time.

4. Learned counsel has also informed that during the course of trial he remained on bail for a period of one year, in as much as the attention has 2 CRLA No. 448 of 2024 been drawn towards Annexure No.4 (Page No.71) of the bail application, showing the bail order dated 17.08.2012 of the present appellant granted during trial, wherein his age has been indicated as 71 years and period of jail was indicated w.e.f. 22.06.2011.

5. So far as the merit of the bail is concerned, Shri Mishra has stated that the present appellant is the father-in-law of the deceased, the cause of death is 'strangulation', he was living separately from his son and his wife (since deceased), he had nothing to do with the family affair of his son. This Court while granting bail during trial considered one fact that there is no antemortem injury except the ligature mark on the neck area.

6. Learned counsel has also submitted that during the course of trial, all relevant/fact witnesses have turned hostile, paper book is not ready, therefore, he has requested that the direction may be given to prepare paper book and he shall argue the appeal on merits as and when the paper book would be prepared and he shall not take any unnecessary adjournment.

7. Per contra, learned A.G.A. has opposed the aforesaid bail application by submitting that the present appellant is being the father-in-law of the deceased, the deceased died under mysterious circumstances in her in-laws place, therefore, in view of the presumption under Section 113-A of the Indian Evidence Act, he is primafacie responsible for such death and, therefore, his bail application may be rejected. So far as the dictum of Hon'ble Apex Court in Anil Ari (supra) is concerned, she has nothing to say but any appropriate order may be passed in the interest of justice.

8. Having heard learned counsels for the parties and having perused the materials available on record; without entering into the merits of the appeal, considering the fact that the present appellant/applicant is aged about 80 years; remained on bail during the course of trial; all fact/relevant witnesses have not supported the prosecution version rather have turned hostile; he is living separately from his son; dictum of Hon'ble Apex Court in Anil Ari (supra); paper book is not ready and undertaking of learned counsel for the appellant/applicant that he shall address the appeal on merits as and when it is next listed after preparation of the paper book, we, hereby, grant bail to the present appellant/applicant.

9. Accordingly, appellant/applicant is allowed. instant bail application filed on behalf of

10. Let the appellant/applicant- Bhanna @ Aziz, who has been convicted under Sections 498-A and 302 I.P.C. and sentenced for maximum term of life imprisonment under Section 302 I.P.C. with fine stipulations and default 3 CRLA No. 448 of 2024 clause, vide judgment and order dated 15.12.2023 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, F.T.C. (O.A.W.), District Sitapur in Sessions Trial No. 986 of 2011(State of U.P. vs. Bhanna @ Aziz), arising out of Case Crime No. 158 of 2011, lodged at Police Station Mishrikh, District Sitapur, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Court concerned subject to the following conditions:- (i) Half of the fine imposed by the Trial Court shall remain stayed subject to the condition that 50 % of the remaining fine amount shall be deposited with the Trial Court by the appellant within four weeks from the date of his actual release from prison, if the same has not been earlier deposited. (ii) The appellant shall cooperate in the early disposal of appeal without seeking unnecessary adjournment. (iii) The appellant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail.

11. It is made clear that during bail, if the appellant commits any offence, the prosecution will be at liberty to file an application for cancellation of bail.

12. As soon as personal bonds and sureties are furnished, photocopies of the same are directed to be transmitted to this Court forthwith by the Trial Court concerned to be kept on record of this appeal. (Order on Appeal)

1. Office is directed to prepare paper book, at the earliest and a copy shall be provided to learned counsel for the appellant, forthwith.

2. List this appeal after doing aforesaid exercise in the month of January, 2026. November 18, 2025 Praveen (Abdhesh Kumar Chaudhary,J.) (Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.)

1. Heard Shri Pradeep Kumar Mishra, appellant/applicant as well as Ms. Meera Tripathi, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the materials available on record. learned counsel first bail application, moved on behalf of

2. This appellant/applicant- Bhanna @ Aziz, in the instant pending appeal. He has been convicted under Sections 498-A and 302 I.P.C. and sentenced for maximum term of life imprisonment under Section 302 I.P.C. with fine stipulations and default clause, vide judgment and order dated 15.12.2023 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, F.T.C. (O.A.W.), District Sitapur in Sessions Trial No. 986 of 2011(State of U.P. vs. Bhanna @ Aziz), arising out of Case Crime No. 158 of 2011, lodged at Police Station Mishrikh, District Sitapur.

3. Learned counsel for the appellant/applicant has pressed this bail application mainly on the ground that the present appellant is aged about 80 years, remained on bail during the course of trial, did not misuse the liberty of bail and he is in jail since 15.12.2023 i.e. about two years. Therefore, he may be given the benefit of the dictum rendered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Anil Ari vs. State of West Bengal, reported in 2009 (3) SCC (Cri) 1377, wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court granted bail to the appellant/applicant- Anil Ari considering his age, which was more than 70 years, the fact that he was on bail during trial and he is in jail for some time.

4. Learned counsel has also informed that during the course of trial he remained on bail for a period of one year, in as much as the attention has 2 CRLA No. 448 of 2024 been drawn towards Annexure No.4 (Page No.71) of the bail application, showing the bail order dated 17.08.2012 of the present appellant granted during trial, wherein his age has been indicated as 71 years and period of jail was indicated w.e.f. 22.06.2011.

5. So far as the merit of the bail is concerned, Shri Mishra has stated that the present appellant is the father-in-law of the deceased, the cause of death is 'strangulation', he was living separately from his son and his wife (since deceased), he had nothing to do with the family affair of his son. This Court while granting bail during trial considered one fact that there is no antemortem injury except the ligature mark on the neck area.

6. Learned counsel has also submitted that during the course of trial, all relevant/fact witnesses have turned hostile, paper book is not ready, therefore, he has requested that the direction may be given to prepare paper book and he shall argue the appeal on merits as and when the paper book would be prepared and he shall not take any unnecessary adjournment.

7. Per contra, learned A.G.A. has opposed the aforesaid bail application by submitting that the present appellant is being the father-in-law of the deceased, the deceased died under mysterious circumstances in her in-laws place, therefore, in view of the presumption under Section 113-A of the Indian Evidence Act, he is primafacie responsible for such death and, therefore, his bail application may be rejected. So far as the dictum of Hon'ble Apex Court in Anil Ari (supra) is concerned, she has nothing to say but any appropriate order may be passed in the interest of justice.

8. Having heard learned counsels for the parties and having perused the materials available on record; without entering into the merits of the appeal, considering the fact that the present appellant/applicant is aged about 80 years; remained on bail during the course of trial; all fact/relevant witnesses have not supported the prosecution version rather have turned hostile; he is living separately from his son; dictum of Hon'ble Apex Court in Anil Ari (supra); paper book is not ready and undertaking of learned counsel for the appellant/applicant that he shall address the appeal on merits as and when it is next listed after preparation of the paper book, we, hereby, grant bail to the present appellant/applicant.

9. Accordingly, appellant/applicant is allowed. instant bail application filed on behalf of

10. Let the appellant/applicant- Bhanna @ Aziz, who has been convicted under Sections 498-A and 302 I.P.C. and sentenced for maximum term of life imprisonment under Section 302 I.P.C. with fine stipulations and default 3 CRLA No. 448 of 2024 clause, vide judgment and order dated 15.12.2023 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, F.T.C. (O.A.W.), District Sitapur in Sessions Trial No. 986 of 2011(State of U.P. vs. Bhanna @ Aziz), arising out of Case Crime No. 158 of 2011, lodged at Police Station Mishrikh, District Sitapur, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Court concerned subject to the following conditions:- (i) Half of the fine imposed by the Trial Court shall remain stayed subject to the condition that 50 % of the remaining fine amount shall be deposited with the Trial Court by the appellant within four weeks from the date of his actual release from prison, if the same has not been earlier deposited. (ii) The appellant shall cooperate in the early disposal of appeal without seeking unnecessary adjournment. (iii) The appellant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail.

11. It is made clear that during bail, if the appellant commits any offence, the prosecution will be at liberty to file an application for cancellation of bail.

12. As soon as personal bonds and sureties are furnished, photocopies of the same are directed to be transmitted to this Court forthwith by the Trial Court concerned to be kept on record of this appeal. (Order on Appeal)

1. Office is directed to prepare paper book, at the earliest and a copy shall be provided to learned counsel for the appellant, forthwith.

2. List this appeal after doing aforesaid exercise in the month of January, 2026. November 18, 2025 Praveen (Abdhesh Kumar Chaudhary,J.) (Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.)