Janardan Chaudhary vs State Of U.P.
- Neutral2026:AHC:103906
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
An applicant convicted and sentenced in a criminal trial may be enlarged on bail during the pendency of an appeal where the court finds that there exists a remote possibility of the appeal being heard in the near future due to the large volume of cases pending before the appellate court, provided that the applicant furnishes personal bond and surety bonds to the satisfaction of the court, and the sentence is suspended during the pendency of the appeal. An applicant released on bail pending criminal appeal shall not transfer, sell, alienate, or create any charge on immovable property in his name without the leave of the appellate court. Where a fine has been imposed by the trial court, an appellant released on bail pending appeal may be directed to deposit 50% of the fine within a specified period, with the remaining 50% stayed until the determination of the criminal appeal, and failure to deposit the fine within the prescribed time shall result in recovery in accordance with law.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
Ram Kesh, Ravi Kumar Singh, Satya Dheer Singh Jadaun, Shikhar Neelkanth
Counsel for Respondent(s)
:
G.A.
Court No. - 44
HON'BLE SIDDHARTH, J.
HON'BLE VINAI KUMAR DWIVEDI, J.
Order on Criminal Suspension of Sentence Application No. 01 of 2025
1. Heard Sri Satya Dheer Singh Jadaun, learned counsel for the appellant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
2. This bail application has been moved on behalf of appellant-applicant, Janardan Chaudhary, praying to enlarge him on bail in Sessions Trial No. 371 of 2024 [CNR No. UPKU010018392024] (State vs. Janardan Chaudhary), arising out of Case Crime No. 02 of 2024, under Sections- 302, 498-A IPC, Police Station- Hanumanganj, District- Kushinagar, during the pendency of this appeal.
3. The prosecution case, in brief, is that the alleged incident occurred on 04.01.2024 at about 04:00 p.m., whereas the first information report was lodged after a delay of two days on 06.01.2024 at 12:10 p.m. The deceased, namely Bhagmaniya Devi, wife of the appellant, was married to him about six years prior to the incident. Initially, the case was registered as Case Crime No. 02 of 2024 under Sections 498-A, 304-B IPC and Section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act at Police Station Hanumaganj, District Kushinagar; however, during investigation, Section 304-B IPC was converted to Section 302 IPC.
4. Upon completion of investigation, the investigating officer submitted charge sheet under Sections 498-A, 302 IPC and Section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act on 30.03.2024 before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kushinagar, who took cognizance and committed the case to the Court of Sessions on 18.04.2024. Charges were framed on 14.06.2024 and during trial, eleven prosecution witnesses were examined. The statement of the appellant under Section 313 Cr.P.C. was recorded, wherein he denied the allegations.
5. Counsel for the appellant has submitted that the trial court recorded an illegal finding that prosecution succeeded in proving its case and beyond reasonable doubt whereby it can be concluded that the appellant committed the crime in question; the appellant should have been given the benefit of the failure of the prosecution to prove its case; the witnesses of fact turned hostile during trial which lead to demolish the whole prosecution case. The witnesses of fact could not prove the case of the prosecution. The appellant has no criminal history apart from the present case. He was not on bail either during investigation and during pendency of trial. The appellant has four children from the aforesaid wedlock. The eldest son of the appellant is aged about 09 years. There is no one in the family of the appellant to take care of his minor children. This appeal is of the year 2025. It is not likely to be heard in near future.
6. Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of applicant-appellant but could not dispute the contentions of the learned counsel for the appellant.
7. After hearing the rival submissions and considering the fact that there are more than two hundreds criminal appeals being listed before this court per day and it is not humanly possible to decide all on merit. There is remote possibility of hearing of this appeal in near future hence prayer for grant of bail to the applicant is allowed.
8. Let the applicant-appellant convicted and sentenced in the aforesaid crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of court concerned. The sentence awarded to applicant-appellant shall also remain suspended during the pendency of this appeal.
9. Applicant-appellant shall not transfer, sell, alienate or create any charge on the immovable property in his name, while on bail save with leave of this court.
10. As soon as personal and surety bonds are furnished, photocopies of the same are directed to be transmitted to this Court forthwith by the concerned court to be kept on record. The appellant-applicant is directed to deposit 50% of fine within a period of one month from the date of his release from jail. Remaining 50% of fine shall remain stayed till the pendency of criminal appeal.
11. It is made clear that in case, the fine is not deposited within the time as specified above, the same shall be recovered in accordance with law.
Order on Criminal Appeal
12. Lower court record has been received.
13. Office is directed to get the paper book prepared within six weeks.
14. List this appeal for hearing in due course.
(Vinai Kumar Dwivedi,J.) (Siddharth,J.)
May 6, 2026
Rohit
This page reproduces a public judgment and a summary of it. It is research material, not legal advice, and it is no substitute for advice from an advocate on your own facts.
Research this judgment with Miss Lucy
Ask what it holds, what has followed it, and what it means for your matter — in plain English, with the citations.
Try Miss Lucy free