Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details


High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation


Bechan Shah v. State Of U.P. - CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 2299 of 2003 [2007] RD-AH 16785 (24 October 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).


Hon'ble R.C. Deepak, J.

Hon'ble K.N. Ojha, J.

Heard learned counsel for the accused-appellant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

It is contended by the learned counsel for the accused-appellant that the recovery of kulhari is false, as the recovery memo does not contain the signature of the accused-appellant. The presence of prosecution witnesses is doubtful at the place of occurrence and no motive has been disclosed for the commission of the murder of the deceased.

On the other hand, learned A.G.A. submits that there was a dispute in regard to the land between the deceased and the accused-appellant and it has been disclosed in the first information report itself. He further submits that there is specific evidence on record against the accused-appellant to have caused kulhari injuries to the deceased and the same finds corroboration from the medical evidence.

We have considered the arguments of the learned counsel for the parties, that the evidence on record and the prevailing circumstances, but without expressing any opinion on the merit thereon, we are not inclined to release the accused-appellant on bail. Consequently, the prayer for bail of the accused-appellant is refused.

Since the accused-appellant is languishing in jail for a considerable period i.e. for the last 6 years, it appears proper in the interest of justice and equity both that the hearing of the appeal be expedited. Consequently, we expedite the hearing of the appeal of the accused-appellant.

Office is directed to prepare the typed paper book within a period of 6 weeks. Thereafter, the appeal be listed for hearing.

Dt./- 24th October, 2007.



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


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 |

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