Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

BHEEM versus STATE OF U.P.

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Bheem v. State Of U.P. - CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. 146 of 2006 [2006] RD-AH 402 (6 January 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. 19

Crl. Misc. Bail Application No.146 of 2006

Bheem .....Vs.....State of U.P.

...

Hon'ble Alok Kumar Singh, J.

Supplementary affidavit has been filed today. Let it be taken on record.

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. and also perused the material on record.

The applicant Bheem is involved in case crime No.997 of 2005, for the offence under Section 302, I.P.C., Police Station Loni, district Ghaziabad.

It is alleged that  the complainant's brother  (deceased) owns a house and several shops in Ashok Vihar main road Delhi Saharanpur Loni road, district Ghaziabad. On 30.10.2005 he had gone to realize rent. At about 9.15 p.m.  the complainant was however informed  that his  brother's body was lying in front of the house. The report  was consequently  lodged without naming any body.

In respect of the genuineness of the prosecution case and involvement of the accused it was argued  that he was not named in the F.I.R. He has been falsely implicated merely on the basis of an extra judicial confession  allegedly made before witness Manoj Kumar. It is also noteworthy the statement  of Manoj Kumar was recorded  after about 1 month on 30.11.2005. There is no other evidence in respect of involvement  of the  accused in the alleged crime.

The bail is, however, opposed by the learned A.G.A.

The points pertaining to nature of accusation, severity of punishment, reasonable apprehension of tampering with the witnesses, prima facie satisfaction of the Court  regarding  proposed evidence and genuineness of the prosecution  case were duly considered.

 In view of the entire facts and circumstances of the case, taking into  consideration some of the arguments, advanced on behalf of the applicant in respect of the points discussed herein above particularly extra judicial confession, without prejudice to the merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case for granting bail. Let the applicant be enlarged on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the concerned Court.  

Dt. 6.1.2006.

Rkb.


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.