Court No. - 80 Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 1302 of 2023 Revisionist :- Mahesh Singh Yadav Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Revisionist :- Himanshu Pandey,R.B. Singh,Sunil Kumar Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Ram Manohar Narayan Mishra,J. Order on prayer for bail/suspension of sentence in memo of revision. The instant criminal revision has been preferred by the revisionist against the judgment and order dated 14.2.2023 passed by learned Additional Session Judge / Special Judge, (Gangster Act) Court No.5, Mirzapur, in Criminal Appeal No. 01 of 2015, whereby the conviction and sentence recorded by the learned trial court against the revisionist vide judement and order dated 14.1.2015 passed in Criminal Case No. 3038 of 2007 for charge under Sections 467, 468, 419 IPC has been affirmed, whereas the revisionist has been acquitted of charge under Section 420 IPC . The revisionist has been awarded sentence of five years rigorous imprisonment and Rs. 5,000/- fine for charge under Section 467 IPC, five years rigorous imprisonment and Rs. 5,000/- fine for charge under Section 468 IPC, five years simple imprisonment and Rs. 5,000/- fine for charge under Section 420 IPC and three years simple imprisonment and Rs. 3,000/- fine for charge under Section 419 IPC along with default stipulations. All the sentences were directed to run concurrently. Heard learned counsel for the revisionist, learned A.G.A. for the State-respondent and perused the material available on record. Learned counsel for the revisionist submits that the main allegation against the revisionist is that he procured appointment as a police constable by filing a false certificate purportedly issued by Bihar Vidyalaya Pariksha Samiti, Patna and when the same was verified from the said Samiti, it was found that the roll number mentioned therein, belongs to some other student. He has next submitted that the lower appellate Court dismissed the criminal appeal preferred by the revisionist against the judgement of trial Court without considering the ground taken therein in right perspective and there are some arguable points which will be addressed at the time of hearing of the revision. He has next submitted that the offence is triable by the magistrate and maximum sentence awarded to the revisionist in the impugned judgement is five years imprisonment as all the sentences are directed to run concurrently. Learned counsel for the revisionist submitted that the revisionist is held in jail custody since 14.2.2023 and he has filed custody certificate issued under the signature of Superintendent, District Jail, Mirzapur, which shows that he has already undergone one year, eight months and twelve days imprisonment till the date of issuance of custody certificate, i. e. 10.8.2024. Thus, as on date, he has already undergone more than two years' actual imprisonment and around two years and five months' imprisonment with remission. He prays for enlarging the revisionist on bail during the pendency of present revision, as the revisionist has already undergone half of the sentence awarded and further submitted that present revision is not likely to be heard in near future, due to heavy backlog. There is no allegation against him regarding misuse of liberty of bail. The accused-revisionist undertake to abide by the conditions of bail. Per contra, learned AGA submitted that offence is of serious nature, as the revisionist has procured employment by producing forged certificate. However, he did not dispute the fact that the revisionist has already undergone half of the sentence awarded to him. Considering the rival submissions made by the parties and nature of offence and the quantum of punishment awarded and the fact that revision is not likely to be decided early, due to pendency of backlog cases and without further commenting on the merits of the case this Court deems it fit to enlarge the accused-revisionists on bail during the pendency of this revision. Let revisionist, Mahesh Singh Yadav convicted and sentenced in the above case be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to furnishing undertaking that he will co-operate in the hearing of the revision. Half of the fine imposed shall be deposited within one month after release and remaining fine shall remain stayed, and in case of failure in depositing the amount of fine within the stipulated period, the trial court will take coercive action against the revisionist. Order on memo of revision. Let this revision be listed for final hearing in its due course. Order Date :- 17.1.2025 HR Digitally signed by :- HEMANT RANJAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad