Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

INDRA BAHADUR SINGH versus STATE OF U.P.

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Indra Bahadur Singh v. State Of U.P. - CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 7480 of 2006 [2007] RD-AH 1517 (31 January 2007)

 

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 K.N. Ojha, J.

We have heard learned counsel for the appellants, Sri V. Singh, learned counsel for the complainant and learned A.G.A. also. We have perused the impugned judgment also.

Affidavit, counter affidavit and rejoinder affidavit filed on behalf of the parties are taken on record.

Admit.

The office is directed to summon the trial court record within eight weeks.

It is contended that two accused Indra Bahadur Singh and Udrej Singh faced trial out of which Udrej Singh expired during pendency of the case in the court below. It is further submitted that sessions trial giving rise to this appeal is that Lal Bahadur Singh was killed by the appellant who was having a sword and two persons, namely Mushafir Singh and Kamta Singh sustained injuries, including injuries caused by sword. On the other hand, a cross case was also registered at crime no. 129-A of 1996 on the report of the present appellant and the appellant, his father and his wife sustained injuries in the cross case which ended in acquittal. It is further urged that the deceased wanted to take possession forcibly by placing a Chhapar on the disputed land and therefore, the trial Judge was not justified in holding the appellant as aggressor.

On the other hand, learned counsel for the complainant and learned A.G.A. have contended that the deceased had three incised wounds. Besides the deceased, Mushafir Singh had as many as seven incised wounds and Kamta Singh had one incised wound on their body. The appellant exceeded his right of defence of property and does not deserve bail.

Taking into consideration that there were cross cases and both the sides sustained injuries in the course of incident as well as this fact that the appellant was on bail during trial, we find it appropriate to enlarge the appellant on bail during pendency of appeal.

Let the appellant-Indra Bahadur Singh be enlarged on bail during pendency of appeal on his executing a personal bond for a sum of Rs.50,000/- and furnishing two sureties, each in the like amount to the satisfaction of C.J.M., Jaunpur in S.T. No. 123 of 1997 State Vs. Udrej Singh and others.

The appellant is directed to deposit the entire amount of fine in the court below within a period of one month from today.

31.1.2007

OP/7480/06


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.