RAJENDRA Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY the Court.-Heard learned counsel for the appellants and learned AGA for the State. Appeal is admitted.

(2.) IT is submitted by learned counsel for the appellants that appellants Rajendra, Laxmi, Brij Kishor, Deoki, Ramesh and Kallu have not been convicted under Sections 302/149 IPC, but they have only been convicted inter alia under section 304 Part II/149 IPC to undergo four years R.I. along with fine of Rs. 5000/-, with default stipulation.

(3.) FOR granting bail in view, Section 389(1) it is mandatory for calling record and hearing the Public Prosecutor. The appellants have been convicted to undergo four years R.I., in this connection a full bench decision in Arimardan v. State of U.P., 2011(4) ADJ 569 (FB), has been placed before us. In this decision the requirement giving opportunity to the public prosecutors for showing cause in writing before hearing bail application of the convict sentenced (1) in death; (2) imprisonment for life; and (3) imprisonment for a term of not less than 10 years. This proviso would not come into play when the appeal is preferred by a convict sentenced to less than 10 years. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the appellants Rajendra, Laxmi, Brijkishore, Deoki, Ramesh and Kallu be released on bail on their furnishing personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Court concerned in Special Case No. 7 of 2003 in case crime No. 334-Aof 2000, under Sections 147,148, 323,149, 304- Part-2/149 IPC P.S. Charkhari, District Mahoba. The realization of fine to the extent of half shall remain stayed during the pendency of this appeal.N