Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

GAUDIN @ GAUVA versus STATE OF U.P.

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Gaudin @ Gauva v. State Of U.P. - CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. 26798 of 2006 [2006] RD-AH 20692 (7 December 2006)

 

This is an UNCERTIFIED copy for information/reference. For authentic copy please refer to certified copy only. In case of any mistake, please bring it to the notice of Joint Registrar(Copying).

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ALLAHABAD

Court No. 47

Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 26798 of 2006

Gaudin  alias Gaua Vs. State of U.P.

Hon'ble Ravindra Singh,J.

Heard Sri G.P.Dixit, learned counsel for the applicant, and the learned A.G.A. for the State and Sri I.K. Chaturvedi, learned counsel for the complainant.

This application has been filed by the applicant Gaudin alias Gauva in Case Crime No. 65 of 2006 under section 302,147,148,149 and 34 I.P.C.P.S. Baberu district Banda.

It is contended by the learned counsel for the applicant the the alleged incident has taken place at about 5.15 a.m. on 14.4.2006. Its F.I.R. has been lodged on 14.4.2006 at about 7.15 a.m. The allegation against the applicant is that he came at the house of the deceased and knocked the door. When the door was opened by the deceased he discharged shot consequently, the deceased received injuries.

According to the post mortem examination report the deceased has received one gun shot wound of entry. It is alleged by the leaned counsel for the applicant the the alleged incident has not been witnessed by any person. It has further been alleged by the learned counsel for the applicant that the alleged incident has not been committed in the manner alleged by the prosecution because the deceased wore only Chaddhi (under garment) no other cloths were there on his person. No blood was found at the place of occurrence.

In reply to the above contentions made by the learned counsel fort he applicant it is submitted by the learned A.G.A. that the in the present case the F.I.R. has been lodged promptly and about one and half litre blood was collected into the cavity of the deceased and when the deceased opened the door, he was murdered by the applicant.

Considering the facts, circumstances of the case and the submission made by the learned counsel for the applicant and the learned A.G.A. and the learned counsel for the complainant, considering the  role assigned to the applicant, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the applicant is not entitled for bail. The prayer for bail is refused.

Accordingly the application is rejected.

Dt. 7.12.2006

NA


Copyright

Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites

Advertisement

dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.