Ravi Kashyap @ Pinku Vs State of U.P.

Allahabad High Court 21 Sep 2011 Criminal Appeal No. 3032 of 2010
Bench: Division Bench
Result Published
Acts Referenced

Judgement Snapshot

Case Number

Criminal Appeal No. 3032 of 2010

Hon'ble Bench

Sudhir Kumar Saxena, J; Abdul Mateen, J

Final Decision

Allowed

Acts Referred

Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Section 389#Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Section 201, 302, 34, 404

Judgement Text

Translate:

1. Heard learned Counsel for the Appellant and learned Additional Government Advocate on this application for bail moved u/s 389 Code of

Criminal Procedure in appeal.

2. The Appellant has been convicted by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 2, Gonda vide judgment and order dated 02.11.2010

passed in Sessions Trial No. 111 of 2006, under Sections 302/34, 201/34 and 404/34 Indian Penal Code and sentenced for a maximum term of

life imprisonment with fine stipulation.

3. We have gone through the judgment as well as record of lower court.

4. It is admitted to the learned Counsel for the parties that the case rests on circumstantial evidence.

5. Learned Counsel for the Appellant has taken us through the prosecution evidence and has argued that the chain of circumstances led by the

prosecution is not complete and the evidence on record does not unerringly establish that the circumstances proved lead to one and the only

conclusion towards the guilty of the accused. He, thus, argued that in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Appellant is entitled to be

enlarged on bail during pendency of the appeal.

6. Learned Additional Government Advocate could not argue anything to dislodge the submissions of the learned Counsel for the Appellant.

7. Having gone through the prosecution evidence and having given our anxious consideration to the entire facts and circumstances of the case, we

are of the view that the Appellant may be enlarged on bail.

8. Let Appellant Ravi Kashyap alias Pinku, convict of above mentioned 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 learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gonda.

9. Realization of half of the fine is stayed. Remaining half fine shall be deposited by the Appellant within one month from the date of his release on

bail.

10. Learned Magistrate shall transmit to this Court photo copies of the bail and surety bonds furnished by the Appellant to be preserved in the

appeal.

From The Blog
Moti Ram Deka & Ors vs General Manager, N.E.F. Railways & Ors (1963)
Oct
19
2025

Landmark Judgements

Moti Ram Deka & Ors vs General Manager, N.E.F. Railways & Ors (1963)
Read More
M/s. Orissa Cement Ltd. & Others vs State of Orissa & Others (1991)
Oct
19
2025

Landmark Judgements

M/s. Orissa Cement Ltd. & Others vs State of Orissa & Others (1991)
Read More