State of Uttar Pradesh v. Ram Lakhan Yadav and others) arising out of Case Crime No

1. Heard Sri Krishna Kumar Singh (K.K. Singh), learned counsel for the appellant/applicant and Sri Vijay Vikas Dwivedi, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State/opposite party.

2. At the very outset, Sri K.K. Singh has requested that he may be permitted to not press the short term bail application and the same may be dismissed as such.

3. Accordingly, the application for short term bail is dismissed being not pressed. in an appeal filed by the first bail application

4. This appellant/applicant (Ram Lakhan Yadav) against the judgement and order dated 10.09.2024 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge/ FTC-II, Bahraich in Session Trial No.104 of 1999 (State of Uttar Pradesh vs. Ram Lakhan Yadav and others) arising out of Case Crime No.223 of 1998, under Sections 323, 324, 325 & 302 I.P.C., Police Station-Jarwal Road, District- Bahraich, whereby the present appellant/ applicant has been convicted and sentenced for maximum period of life imprisonment with fine stipulations, so far as it relates to the present appellant/ applicant (Ram Lakhan Yadav).

5. Learned counsel for the appellant/applicant has stated that the present appellant/ applicant is a critical patient of heart as well as of Nephrology and medical papers to that effect have been shown which reveals that the 2 CRLA No. 3059 of 2024 appellant/ applicant is a critical patient of Nephrology. Therefore, Sri Singh has requested that the bail of the present appellant/ applicant may be considered on account of his critical ailment.

6. Sri Singh has further submitted that the present appellant/applicant is aged about 73 years. He remained on bail during trial. He did not misuse the liberty of bail and during trial period he remained on bail for a couple of months and pursuant to the conviction order, he is in jail with effect from

10.09.2024, therefore, his total period of incarceration is one and half years approx. On the basis of the aforesaid fact and circumstances, Sri Singh has requested that the present appellant/applicant may be extended the benefit of dictum of Hon'ble Supreme Court rendered in re: Anil Ari vs. State of West Bengal reported in (2009) 11 SCC 363. In support of his contention, Sri Singh has referred paras-5 & 8, which read as under:- "5. On 29-9-2008 a special leave petition was dismissed in respect of Petitioners 2 to

4. Notice was issued qua Petitioner 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.

8. In the peculiar facts of the case considering the age of the appellant-accused 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 the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, Fast Track, Second Court, Contai, Purba Medinipur in Sessions Trial No. 112 of 2004 relating to CR No. 432 of 1994. It is made clear that we have directed release of Appellant 1 only on considering the fact that he is 70 years old and not on consideration of the merits of the case."

7. In the aforesaid judgment, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has granted bail to Anil Ari (supra) i.e. the appellant before it considering his age as 70 years, he remained in jail for about one year. He was on bail during trial and did not misuse the liberty of bail. Therefore, Sri Singh has stated that all the aforesaid facts are being attracted in the present case, hence, benefit of the aforesaid judgment may be extended to the present appellant/ applicant.

8. Sri Singh has further submitted that the paper-book is not ready and if the paper-book is prepared and the copies thereof have been provided to the parties concerned, he shall argue the appeal on merits without taking any unnecessary adjournment. He is ready to argue the appeal on merits for the reason that this is a matter of cross case and both the sides have received injuries. He has further submitted that the present appellant/ applicant is 3 CRLA No. 3059 of 2024 having no prior criminal history of any kind whatsoever. He undertakes that the present appellant/applicant shall not misuse the liberty of bail and shall abide by all terms and conditions of bail order.

9. Per contra, Sri Dwivedi, learned Additional Government Advocate has vehemently opposed the bail application by submitting that on the basis of credible evidence, the present appellant/ applicant has been convicted for life imprisonment. So far as the ailment and the fact that he remained on bail during trial and he is aged about 73 years are concerned, he has nothing to say but the direction may be issued to the office to prepare the paper-book at the earliest so that the appeal may be heard finally on merits.

10. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having perused the material available on record, without entering into merits of the appeal, considering the fact that the present appellant /applicant is a critical and chronic patient of Nephrology i.e. 'CKD stage V', aged about 73 years, remained on bail during trial, did not misuse the liberty of bail, his total period of incarceration, as on today, is one and half years, the dictum of Apex Court rendered in re: Anil Ari (supra) which is, prima-facie, applicable in the present case; there is no criminal history of any kind whatsoever; the paper-book is not ready and the undertaking of learned counsel for the present appellant/applicant that he will not misuse the liberty of bail and he shall argue the appeal on merits without taking any unnecessary adjournment, we find it appropriate that the present appellant/ applicant may be released on bail.

11. Accordingly, the bail application is disposed of.

12. Let the present appellant/applicant (Ram Lakhan Yadav), convict of the aforesaid session trial, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions. (i) The original copy of the bail bonds and sureties be transmitted to this Court to be kept on record after keeping its photocopy on record. (ii) So far as the amount of fine is concerned, the present appellant/applicant shall deposit 50% of the total fine amount within four weeks from the date of his release, however, the remaining 50% of the fine amount shall remain stayed. On deposit of the said fine amount, the same shall be released to the complainant, as compensation under Section 357 Cr.P.C. as directed by the Ld. Trial Court. 4 CRLA No. 3059 of 2024 (iii) It is made clear that if the accused-appellant/applicant commits any offence during course of bail, the prosecution will be at liberty to file an application for cancellation of bail. (iv) The present appellant/ applicant shall not leave the country without prior permission of the Court. (Order on Appeal)

13.List this criminal appeal in the month of March 2026 along with other connected appeals.

14. Office is directed to prepare the paper-book within a period of two months and copy thereof be provided to all concerning parties on payment of usual charges. (Abdhesh Kumar Chaudhary,J.) (Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.) December17,2025 Suresh

1. Heard Sri Krishna Kumar Singh (K.K. Singh), learned counsel for the appellant/applicant and Sri Vijay Vikas Dwivedi, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State/opposite party.

2. At the very outset, Sri K.K. Singh has requested that he may be permitted to not press the short term bail application and the same may be dismissed as such.

3. Accordingly, the application for short term bail is dismissed being not pressed. in an appeal filed by the first bail application

4. This appellant/applicant (Ram Lakhan Yadav) against the judgement and order dated 10.09.2024 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge/ FTC-II, Bahraich in Session Trial No.104 of 1999 (State of Uttar Pradesh vs. Ram Lakhan Yadav and others) arising out of Case Crime No.223 of 1998, under Sections 323, 324, 325 & 302 I.P.C., Police Station-Jarwal Road, District- Bahraich, whereby the present appellant/ applicant has been convicted and sentenced for maximum period of life imprisonment with fine stipulations, so far as it relates to the present appellant/ applicant (Ram Lakhan Yadav).

5. Learned counsel for the appellant/applicant has stated that the present appellant/ applicant is a critical patient of heart as well as of Nephrology and medical papers to that effect have been shown which reveals that the 2 CRLA No. 3059 of 2024 appellant/ applicant is a critical patient of Nephrology. Therefore, Sri Singh has requested that the bail of the present appellant/ applicant may be considered on account of his critical ailment.

6. Sri Singh has further submitted that the present appellant/applicant is aged about 73 years. He remained on bail during trial. He did not misuse the liberty of bail and during trial period he remained on bail for a couple of months and pursuant to the conviction order, he is in jail with effect from

10.09.2024, therefore, his total period of incarceration is one and half years approx. On the basis of the aforesaid fact and circumstances, Sri Singh has requested that the present appellant/applicant may be extended the benefit of dictum of Hon'ble Supreme Court rendered in re: Anil Ari vs. State of West Bengal reported in (2009) 11 SCC 363. In support of his contention, Sri Singh has referred paras-5 & 8, which read as under:- "5. On 29-9-2008 a special leave petition was dismissed in respect of Petitioners 2 to

4. Notice was issued qua Petitioner 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.

8. In the peculiar facts of the case considering the age of the appellant-accused 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 the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, Fast Track, Second Court, Contai, Purba Medinipur in Sessions Trial No. 112 of 2004 relating to CR No. 432 of 1994. It is made clear that we have directed release of Appellant 1 only on considering the fact that he is 70 years old and not on consideration of the merits of the case."

7. In the aforesaid judgment, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has granted bail to Anil Ari (supra) i.e. the appellant before it considering his age as 70 years, he remained in jail for about one year. He was on bail during trial and did not misuse the liberty of bail. Therefore, Sri Singh has stated that all the aforesaid facts are being attracted in the present case, hence, benefit of the aforesaid judgment may be extended to the present appellant/ applicant.

8. Sri Singh has further submitted that the paper-book is not ready and if the paper-book is prepared and the copies thereof have been provided to the parties concerned, he shall argue the appeal on merits without taking any unnecessary adjournment. He is ready to argue the appeal on merits for the reason that this is a matter of cross case and both the sides have received injuries. He has further submitted that the present appellant/ applicant is 3 CRLA No. 3059 of 2024 having no prior criminal history of any kind whatsoever. He undertakes that the present appellant/applicant shall not misuse the liberty of bail and shall abide by all terms and conditions of bail order.

9. Per contra, Sri Dwivedi, learned Additional Government Advocate has vehemently opposed the bail application by submitting that on the basis of credible evidence, the present appellant/ applicant has been convicted for life imprisonment. So far as the ailment and the fact that he remained on bail during trial and he is aged about 73 years are concerned, he has nothing to say but the direction may be issued to the office to prepare the paper-book at the earliest so that the appeal may be heard finally on merits.

10. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having perused the material available on record, without entering into merits of the appeal, considering the fact that the present appellant /applicant is a critical and chronic patient of Nephrology i.e. 'CKD stage V', aged about 73 years, remained on bail during trial, did not misuse the liberty of bail, his total period of incarceration, as on today, is one and half years, the dictum of Apex Court rendered in re: Anil Ari (supra) which is, prima-facie, applicable in the present case; there is no criminal history of any kind whatsoever; the paper-book is not ready and the undertaking of learned counsel for the present appellant/applicant that he will not misuse the liberty of bail and he shall argue the appeal on merits without taking any unnecessary adjournment, we find it appropriate that the present appellant/ applicant may be released on bail.

11. Accordingly, the bail application is disposed of.

12. Let the present appellant/applicant (Ram Lakhan Yadav), convict of the aforesaid session trial, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions. (i) The original copy of the bail bonds and sureties be transmitted to this Court to be kept on record after keeping its photocopy on record. (ii) So far as the amount of fine is concerned, the present appellant/applicant shall deposit 50% of the total fine amount within four weeks from the date of his release, however, the remaining 50% of the fine amount shall remain stayed. On deposit of the said fine amount, the same shall be released to the complainant, as compensation under Section 357 Cr.P.C. as directed by the Ld. Trial Court. 4 CRLA No. 3059 of 2024 (iii) It is made clear that if the accused-appellant/applicant commits any offence during course of bail, the prosecution will be at liberty to file an application for cancellation of bail. (iv) The present appellant/ applicant shall not leave the country without prior permission of the Court. (Order on Appeal)

13.List this criminal appeal in the month of March 2026 along with other connected appeals.

14. Office is directed to prepare the paper-book within a period of two months and copy thereof be provided to all concerning parties on payment of usual charges. (Abdhesh Kumar Chaudhary,J.) (Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.) December17,2025 Suresh