TARA DEVI Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Sri Arvind Srivastava, learned counsel for the appellants and learned AGA in opposition in support and opposition of bail prayers of the two appellants, Smt. Tara Devi and her husband Shivdan Gaur, who were in-laws of the deceased Sona Devi, and who have been convicted for offences U/Ss 306, 498A,201 I.P.C., in S.T. No. 147 of 2008, State of U.P. versus Brajnandan and others, by Additional Session's Judge, Court No. 3 , Mau.

(2.) DURING course of argument the neat question of law which has been mooted for consideration and judicial determination by appellant's counsel is as to whether pending consideration of final relief of bail U/S 389 Cr.P.C., in short code, can an appellant be released on short term bail inspite of newly added proviso to the said section? Submission of appellant's counsel is that requirement of granting time to State counsel to file an objection on the bail prayer of an appellant, who has been convicted and sentenced to ten years or more of imprisonment is restricted only to grant of final relief for bail and not for granting interim bail pending consideration of final relief of bail. According to appellant's contention proviso attached to section 389 of the code does not curtail or abridge power of appellant court to grant interim bail pending consideration final relief of bail. Considered in right prospective said proviso cannot scuttle power of high court to grant interim bail nor it can put an embargo on such a power of this court to grant interim bail to deserving appellants submitted appellant counsel. Before deliberating and dilating on the harangued question a brief resume of preceding facts are noted below.

(3.) BAIL of a convicted accused and suspension of his sentence during pendency of appeal by that convicted accused is governed by section 389 of the code and consequently that section is reproduced below:-