Hori Lal v. State of U.P.). The aforesaid order reads as under

1. Heard Sri Ranjan Shukla, learned counsel for the appellant and Sri R.S. Dwivedi, learned AGA for the State.

2. The present bail application has been filed in Sessions Trial No. 30 of 2015 in Case Crime no. 888 of 2014 u/s 147, 148, 364, 324/34, 326/34, 302/34, 201, 120B IPC, P.S. Barasagvar, District Unnao. The present appellant is in jail since 30.3.2024. During the course of the trial the appellant remained in jail for couple of months but after getting bail he remained on bail during the entire period of trial and he did not misuse the liberty of bail.

3. At the very outset learned counsel for the appellant has pressed the parity of the present appellant with the co-accused Hori Lal who has been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 12.3.2025 in Criminal Appeal No. 1718 of 2024 (Hori Lal vs. State of U.P.). The aforesaid order reads as under : "Order on C.M.A. No.IA/1/2024 (Bail Application)

1. Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

2. A prayer for bail has been made by the appellant in this criminal appeal, which has been filed against the judgement and order dated 30-03-2024 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court No.-1, District- Unnao in S.T. No.-30 of 2015 arising out of Case Crime No.888/2014 under Sections- 147, 148, 364, 324/34, 326/34, 302/34, 201, 120-B I.P.C, P.S.- Barasagvar, District-Unnao (State vs Ramraj and others).

3. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that appellant was falsely implicated in 2 CRLA No. 1728 of 2024 the present case on the basis of presumption. As per the prosecution case, on the date of alleged incident, appellant and other co-accused persons along with Constable Mahaveer came to the house of informant and knocked the door. Outside the house, son and mother-in-law of the informant were sleeping but they were not aware of the alleged incident. On the insistence of the accused persons, husband of the informant went with the accused persons, and thereafter, he was found dead. He further submits that trial court has failed to appreciate the evidences in the correct perspective as it is highly improbable that son and mother-in-law of the informant were sleeping outside the house but they were not aware of the whole incident. He also submits that Mahaveer was summoned by the trial court under Section 319 CrPC and he was also prosecuted, later on, he was acquitted. He next submits that appellant was on bail during the course of trial and he never misused the liberty of bail. He further submits that the appeal has already been admitted and there is no possibility of hearing of the appeal in near future, hence, the appellant is entitled for regular bail.

4. Learned A.G.A. opposes the prayer for bail and submits that conviction of the appellant is on the basis of evidence on record but he does not dispute this fact that on the date of alleged incident son and mother-in-law of informant were sleeping outside the house but there is no evidence that they had known the said incident when the accused persons came to the house of informant and knocked the door.

5. Having heard the submission made by learned counsel for the appellant as well as learned A.G.A and perused the material brought on record, as the appeal has already been admitted and there is no possibility of conclusion of appeal in near future. Therefore, this Court is of the view that appellant is entitled to be released on bail during the pendency of criminal appeal before this Court.

6. Hence, prima facie, case for bail is made out, at this stage.

7. Accordingly, the application for bail is allowed.

8. Let the appellant- Horilal involved in aforesaid case be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 25,000/- with two sureties of the like amount subject to following conditions:- (i) Fine imposed by the trial Court shall be deposited by the appellant at the time of his release. (ii) The appellant shall cooperate in the 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.

9. As soon as personal bonds and sureties are furnished, photocopies of the same are 3 CRLA No. 1728 of 2024 directed to be transmitted to this Court forthwith by the trial court concerned to be kept on record of this appeal.

10. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. Order on Appeal List this case in the second week of April, 2025."

4. He has also submitted that another co-accused Smt. Vindeshwari has been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 2.1.2025 in Criminal Appeal No. 1555 of 2024 (Smt. Bindeshwari vs. State of U.P. ).

5. Learned counsel for the appellant has drawn attention of this Court towards the statement of P.W.-1 Sunita showing that the role of the present appellant is similar to the co-accused Hori Lal who has been granted bail. He has further submitted that the paper-book has not been prepared and as soon as the paper book is prepared he shall argue the appeal finally and shall not take any unnecessary adjournment. He has also submitted that the present appellant is having no prior criminal history of any kind whatsoever.

6. Per contra, learned AGA has opposed the aforesaid bail application by submitting that after considering the incriminating material and evidence against the present appellant the learned trial court convicted him for life imprisonment. However, he could not dispute the fact that co-accused Horilal who is having similar role has been granted bail by this Court.

7. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having perused the material available on record, considering the fact that the appeal has already been admitted by this Court and there is no possibility of conclusion of appeal in near future and the co- accused Horilal who is having similar role with the present appellant has been granted bail by this court, therefore, this court is of the view that the appellant is entitled to be released on bail during the pendency of the criminal appeal before this Court.

8. Hence, prima-facie, case for bail is made out at this stage.

9. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed and the sentence of the appellant is hereby suspended till the disposal of the appeal.

10. Let the appellant- Ramraj, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 25,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount subject to following conditions:- (i) Fine imposed by the trial Court shall be deposited by the appellant at the time of his release. 4 CRLA No. 1728 of 2024 (ii) The appellant shall cooperate in the 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. 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.

12. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. Order on Appeal List this case in the month of December, 2025. October 14, 2025 Om (Abdhesh Kumar Chaudhary,J.) (Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.)

1. Heard Sri Ranjan Shukla, learned counsel for the appellant and Sri R.S. Dwivedi, learned AGA for the State.

2. The present bail application has been filed in Sessions Trial No. 30 of 2015 in Case Crime no. 888 of 2014 u/s 147, 148, 364, 324/34, 326/34, 302/34, 201, 120B IPC, P.S. Barasagvar, District Unnao. The present appellant is in jail since 30.3.2024. During the course of the trial the appellant remained in jail for couple of months but after getting bail he remained on bail during the entire period of trial and he did not misuse the liberty of bail.

3. At the very outset learned counsel for the appellant has pressed the parity of the present appellant with the co-accused Hori Lal who has been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 12.3.2025 in Criminal Appeal No. 1718 of 2024 (Hori Lal vs. State of U.P.). The aforesaid order reads as under : "Order on C.M.A. No.IA/1/2024 (Bail Application)

1. Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

2. A prayer for bail has been made by the appellant in this criminal appeal, which has been filed against the judgement and order dated 30-03-2024 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court No.-1, District- Unnao in S.T. No.-30 of 2015 arising out of Case Crime No.888/2014 under Sections- 147, 148, 364, 324/34, 326/34, 302/34, 201, 120-B I.P.C, P.S.- Barasagvar, District-Unnao (State vs Ramraj and others).

3. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that appellant was falsely implicated in 2 CRLA No. 1728 of 2024 the present case on the basis of presumption. As per the prosecution case, on the date of alleged incident, appellant and other co-accused persons along with Constable Mahaveer came to the house of informant and knocked the door. Outside the house, son and mother-in-law of the informant were sleeping but they were not aware of the alleged incident. On the insistence of the accused persons, husband of the informant went with the accused persons, and thereafter, he was found dead. He further submits that trial court has failed to appreciate the evidences in the correct perspective as it is highly improbable that son and mother-in-law of the informant were sleeping outside the house but they were not aware of the whole incident. He also submits that Mahaveer was summoned by the trial court under Section 319 CrPC and he was also prosecuted, later on, he was acquitted. He next submits that appellant was on bail during the course of trial and he never misused the liberty of bail. He further submits that the appeal has already been admitted and there is no possibility of hearing of the appeal in near future, hence, the appellant is entitled for regular bail.

4. Learned A.G.A. opposes the prayer for bail and submits that conviction of the appellant is on the basis of evidence on record but he does not dispute this fact that on the date of alleged incident son and mother-in-law of informant were sleeping outside the house but there is no evidence that they had known the said incident when the accused persons came to the house of informant and knocked the door.

5. Having heard the submission made by learned counsel for the appellant as well as learned A.G.A and perused the material brought on record, as the appeal has already been admitted and there is no possibility of conclusion of appeal in near future. Therefore, this Court is of the view that appellant is entitled to be released on bail during the pendency of criminal appeal before this Court.

6. Hence, prima facie, case for bail is made out, at this stage.

7. Accordingly, the application for bail is allowed.

8. Let the appellant- Horilal involved in aforesaid case be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 25,000/- with two sureties of the like amount subject to following conditions:- (i) Fine imposed by the trial Court shall be deposited by the appellant at the time of his release. (ii) The appellant shall cooperate in the 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.

9. As soon as personal bonds and sureties are furnished, photocopies of the same are 3 CRLA No. 1728 of 2024 directed to be transmitted to this Court forthwith by the trial court concerned to be kept on record of this appeal.

10. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. Order on Appeal List this case in the second week of April, 2025."

4. He has also submitted that another co-accused Smt. Vindeshwari has been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 2.1.2025 in Criminal Appeal No. 1555 of 2024 (Smt. Bindeshwari vs. State of U.P. ).

5. Learned counsel for the appellant has drawn attention of this Court towards the statement of P.W.-1 Sunita showing that the role of the present appellant is similar to the co-accused Hori Lal who has been granted bail. He has further submitted that the paper-book has not been prepared and as soon as the paper book is prepared he shall argue the appeal finally and shall not take any unnecessary adjournment. He has also submitted that the present appellant is having no prior criminal history of any kind whatsoever.

6. Per contra, learned AGA has opposed the aforesaid bail application by submitting that after considering the incriminating material and evidence against the present appellant the learned trial court convicted him for life imprisonment. However, he could not dispute the fact that co-accused Horilal who is having similar role has been granted bail by this Court.

7. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having perused the material available on record, considering the fact that the appeal has already been admitted by this Court and there is no possibility of conclusion of appeal in near future and the co- accused Horilal who is having similar role with the present appellant has been granted bail by this court, therefore, this court is of the view that the appellant is entitled to be released on bail during the pendency of the criminal appeal before this Court.

8. Hence, prima-facie, case for bail is made out at this stage.

9. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed and the sentence of the appellant is hereby suspended till the disposal of the appeal.

10. Let the appellant- Ramraj, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 25,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount subject to following conditions:- (i) Fine imposed by the trial Court shall be deposited by the appellant at the time of his release. 4 CRLA No. 1728 of 2024 (ii) The appellant shall cooperate in the 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. 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.

12. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. Order on Appeal List this case in the month of December, 2025. October 14, 2025 Om (Abdhesh Kumar Chaudhary,J.) (Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.)