AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
The matter was taken up through Video Conferencing. Learned counsels for the parties had no objection with it and submitted that the audio and video qualities are good.
I.A. No. 3802 of 2020 18/ 19.08.2020. Heard learned counsel for the appellant No. 1, Mehtab Sk. and the learned counsel for the State on the Interlocutory Application filed by the appellant for renewing the prayer for bail during the pendency of this appeal.
The appellant No. 1, alongwith other co-accused has been convicted for the offence under Sections 302, 324, 307 / 149 of the Indian Penal Code. The earlier prayer for bail of the appellant did not find favour from this Court.
Though this is a case of double murder which took place due to the land dispute between the parties, there appears to be omnibus allegation against the appellant and the other co-accused persons, so far as the allegation of assault on the deceased persons are concerned. This apart, the injury reports and the post-mortem reports were missing and the original thereof could not be proved. Learned counsel has accordingly, renewed the prayer for bail submitting that the similarly situated co-accused Ala Sk. @ Alauddin Sk. has been granted bail by order dated 03.06.2020 in I.A. No. 7763 of 2019. It is also submitted that the appellant was on bail during the pendency of the trial, and he is in custody since the date of Judgement, i.e., 30th August, 2011.
In the facts and circumstances of this case and also taking into consideration that there is only omnibus allegation against the appellant so far as the assaults upon the deceased are concerned, as also taking into consideration the fact that the appellant was on bail during the pendency of the trial, we are inclined to release the appellant, Mehtab Sk., on bail. Accordingly, appellant No. 1, Mehtab Sk. is directed to be released on bail during the pendency of this appeal, on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (ten thousand), with two sureties of the like amount each, to the satisfaction of learned 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Rajmahal, Sahibganj, in connection with S.C. Case No. 212 of 1993.
The aforesaid interlocutory application stands allowed.