Milkha Singh v. State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Of Home Lko

1. Heard Sri Amit Kumar Awasthi and Sri Devendra Kumar Singh holding brief of Ms. Madhulika Yadav, learned counsel for the applicant-appellant, Ms. Meera Tripathi, learned AGA for the State and name of Sri Jainendra Kumar Verma, learned counsel for the opposite is printed in the cause list but none has appeared on his behalf nor any request for adjournment has been made.

2. Learned counsel for the appellant has filed supplementary affidavit, same is taken on record.

3. Though the learned counsel for the appellant has filed application for interim relief / parole on account of his serious illness in Session Trial No. 1126 of 2010, State Vs. Makkhan Singh and four others, arising out of Case Crime No. 239 of 2010 P.S. Palia, District Lakhimpur Kheri wherein the appellant/applicant has been convicted under Sections 302, 308, 304, 323, 504, 506 IPC and sentenced for maximum punishment of life 2 CRLA No. 2053 of 2024 imprisonment with fine stipulations but he has also pressed his first bail application seeking the benefit of dictum of Apex Court in re: Anil Ari v. State of West Bengal 2009 Cri. L. J. 1328. However, he has requested that his short term bail application may be not pressed and his regular bail application may be considered.

4. Sri Awasthi has stated that the Apex Court has granted bail to Anil Ari considering the fact that he was aged about 70 years of age, he remained in jail for one year, was on bail during trial, did not misuse the liberty of bail as has been indicated in para 6 of the order of the Apex Court. The present appellant is aged about 80 years, he remained on bail during the trial, did not misuse the liberty of bail and remained in jail for about seven months during the trial period and pursuant to the conviction order he is in jail since

10.6.2024, therefore, the total period of incarceration is more than two years. Para nos. 6 and 13 of the judgment in re: Anil Ari (supra) is as under : "6. On 29.9.2008 a Special Leave Petition was dismissed in respect of petitioner Nos.2 to 4. Notice was issued qua petitioner No.1 only. Learned counsel for the appellant- Anil Ari submitted that the said appellant is nearly 70 years old and is in jail for nearly one year and that he was on bail during trial.

13. On the peculiar facts of the case considering the age of the accused appellant Anil Ari, we direct that he shall be released on bail on furnishing security of Rs.30,000/- with two sureties of like amount to the satisfaction of learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, Fast Track, Second Court, Contai, Purba Medinipur in Sessions trial No.112/2004 relating to C.R. No.432/1994. It is made clear that we have directed release of appellant No.1 only on considering the fact that he is 70 years old and not on consideration of the merits of the case."

5. In para 2 and 3 of the supplementary affidavit the learned counsel for the appellant has indicated the relevant facts seeking benefit of the dictum of Apex Court in re: Anil Ari (supra).

6. Learned counsel for the appellant has further submitted that the paper- book in this appeal is not ready and that he will argue the appeal on merits as and when the paper-book is prepared and copies thereof is provided to all concerned and he shall not take any unnecessary adjournment. 3 CRLA No. 2053 of 2024

7. Per contra, Ms. Meera Tripathi, learned AGA has opposed the aforesaid bail application by submitting that this is a case of double murder. However, she could not dispute the fact which have been indicated by the learned counsel for the appellant seeking the benefit of dictum of Apex Court in re: Anil Ari (supra) and she also prayed a direction for preparing the paper- book.

8. Having heard learned counsel for the parties; perused the material available on record and without entering into the merits of the appeal; considering the fact that the present appellant is presently aged about 80 years of age; his total period of incarceration as on today is more than two years; he remained on bail during trial; he did not misuse the liberty of bail; the dictum of Apex Court in re: Anil Ari (supra); paper-book is not ready and the undertaking that he shall not misuse the liberty of bail; we are hereby convinced that he may be enlarged on bail.

9. Accordingly, the short term bail is rejected and the regular bail application is disposed of.

10. Let the appellant- Milkha Singh, convict of the aforesaid sessions trial, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned.

11. 50% fine imposed by the learned Trial Court shall be deposited by the appellant within a period of four weeks, failing which, the bail granted to the appellant shall stand cancelled. However, the remaining 50% fine imposed by the learned Trial Court shall remain stayed.

12. 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.

13. 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.

14. Office is directed to prepare the paper-book of the case, if not already prepared and supply a copy of the same to the learned counsel for the parties as per rules. 4 CRLA No. 2053 of 2024

15. List this appeal for final hearing in the month of March, 2026 along with connected appeal.

16. Before parting with it is made clear that the present appellant has been granted bail in the light of dictum of Apex Court in re: Anil Ari (supra), therefore, the co-accused may not claim the parity with the present appellant and his bail application would be decided on its own merit. (Abdhesh Kumar Chaudhary,J.) (Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.) December 17, 2025 Om

1. Heard Sri Amit Kumar Awasthi and Sri Devendra Kumar Singh holding brief of Ms. Madhulika Yadav, learned counsel for the applicant-appellant, Ms. Meera Tripathi, learned AGA for the State and name of Sri Jainendra Kumar Verma, learned counsel for the opposite is printed in the cause list but none has appeared on his behalf nor any request for adjournment has been made.

2. Learned counsel for the appellant has filed supplementary affidavit, same is taken on record.

3. Though the learned counsel for the appellant has filed application for interim relief / parole on account of his serious illness in Session Trial No. 1126 of 2010, State Vs. Makkhan Singh and four others, arising out of Case Crime No. 239 of 2010 P.S. Palia, District Lakhimpur Kheri wherein the appellant/applicant has been convicted under Sections 302, 308, 304, 323, 504, 506 IPC and sentenced for maximum punishment of life 2 CRLA No. 2053 of 2024 imprisonment with fine stipulations but he has also pressed his first bail application seeking the benefit of dictum of Apex Court in re: Anil Ari v. State of West Bengal 2009 Cri. L. J. 1328. However, he has requested that his short term bail application may be not pressed and his regular bail application may be considered.

4. Sri Awasthi has stated that the Apex Court has granted bail to Anil Ari considering the fact that he was aged about 70 years of age, he remained in jail for one year, was on bail during trial, did not misuse the liberty of bail as has been indicated in para 6 of the order of the Apex Court. The present appellant is aged about 80 years, he remained on bail during the trial, did not misuse the liberty of bail and remained in jail for about seven months during the trial period and pursuant to the conviction order he is in jail since

10.6.2024, therefore, the total period of incarceration is more than two years. Para nos. 6 and 13 of the judgment in re: Anil Ari (supra) is as under : "6. On 29.9.2008 a Special Leave Petition was dismissed in respect of petitioner Nos.2 to 4. Notice was issued qua petitioner No.1 only. Learned counsel for the appellant- Anil Ari submitted that the said appellant is nearly 70 years old and is in jail for nearly one year and that he was on bail during trial.

13. On the peculiar facts of the case considering the age of the accused appellant Anil Ari, we direct that he shall be released on bail on furnishing security of Rs.30,000/- with two sureties of like amount to the satisfaction of learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, Fast Track, Second Court, Contai, Purba Medinipur in Sessions trial No.112/2004 relating to C.R. No.432/1994. It is made clear that we have directed release of appellant No.1 only on considering the fact that he is 70 years old and not on consideration of the merits of the case."

5. In para 2 and 3 of the supplementary affidavit the learned counsel for the appellant has indicated the relevant facts seeking benefit of the dictum of Apex Court in re: Anil Ari (supra).

6. Learned counsel for the appellant has further submitted that the paper- book in this appeal is not ready and that he will argue the appeal on merits as and when the paper-book is prepared and copies thereof is provided to all concerned and he shall not take any unnecessary adjournment. 3 CRLA No. 2053 of 2024

7. Per contra, Ms. Meera Tripathi, learned AGA has opposed the aforesaid bail application by submitting that this is a case of double murder. However, she could not dispute the fact which have been indicated by the learned counsel for the appellant seeking the benefit of dictum of Apex Court in re: Anil Ari (supra) and she also prayed a direction for preparing the paper- book.

8. Having heard learned counsel for the parties; perused the material available on record and without entering into the merits of the appeal; considering the fact that the present appellant is presently aged about 80 years of age; his total period of incarceration as on today is more than two years; he remained on bail during trial; he did not misuse the liberty of bail; the dictum of Apex Court in re: Anil Ari (supra); paper-book is not ready and the undertaking that he shall not misuse the liberty of bail; we are hereby convinced that he may be enlarged on bail.

9. Accordingly, the short term bail is rejected and the regular bail application is disposed of.

10. Let the appellant- Milkha Singh, convict of the aforesaid sessions trial, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned.

11. 50% fine imposed by the learned Trial Court shall be deposited by the appellant within a period of four weeks, failing which, the bail granted to the appellant shall stand cancelled. However, the remaining 50% fine imposed by the learned Trial Court shall remain stayed.

12. 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.

13. 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.

14. Office is directed to prepare the paper-book of the case, if not already prepared and supply a copy of the same to the learned counsel for the parties as per rules. 4 CRLA No. 2053 of 2024

15. List this appeal for final hearing in the month of March, 2026 along with connected appeal.

16. Before parting with it is made clear that the present appellant has been granted bail in the light of dictum of Apex Court in re: Anil Ari (supra), therefore, the co-accused may not claim the parity with the present appellant and his bail application would be decided on its own merit. (Abdhesh Kumar Chaudhary,J.) (Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.) December 17, 2025 Om