Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

BABADEEN & ANOTHER versus STATE OF U.P.

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Babadeen & Another v. State Of U.P. - CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 2029 of 2006 [2006] RD-AH 7088 (1 April 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

Hon'ble Mukteshwar Prasad, J.

Hon'ble (Mrs.) Saroj Bala, J.

Supplementary affidavit filed today on behalf of the appellants is taken on record.

Heard.

Admit.

Issue notice.

Office is directed to summon the record within a period of four weeks.

We have heard learned counsel for the appellants, learned A.G.A. and perused the judgment under appeal.

It is contended that appellants no.1 and 2 were armed with axe and Pharsa respectively. According to F.I.R. itself, the appellant no. 1 is said to have exhorted his associates to kill Harish Chandra and on his exhortation, his associates killed Harish Chandra and caused injury to Ram Pratap. It is also urged that both the appellants were on bail in the court below and injury no.1 of Ram Pratap has not been caused by axe or Pharsa.

Taking into consideration all facts and circumstances of the case, we are inclined to release the appellants on bail.

Let the appellants- Babadeen and Rakesh be enlarged on bail during pendency of appeal on their executing a personal bond and furnishing two sureties, each in the like amount to the satisfaction of C.J.M., Banda in S.T.     No. 10 of 2005, State Vs. Babadeen and others provided the entire amount of fine is deposited by each of the appellants in the court below within a period of one month from today.

The Chief Judicial Magistrate will send photocopies of the bail bonds to the Court immediately.

18.4.2006

OP/2029/06


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.