Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

MOHAMMAD SHAFEEQ versus STATE OF U.P.& ANOTHER.

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Mohammad Shafeeq v. State Of U.P.& Another. - CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 397 of 2007 [2007] RD-AH 18811 (12 December 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 AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH

This is a revision against the order dated 31.5.2007 whereby the revisionist's application for the release of tempo No.UP-32/BN 3295 relating to case crime No.84 of 2007 under Sections 323/324/325 IPC was rejected. The magistrate stated in his order that the said tempo was used by the terrorists Maqsood Ahmed alias Ashfaq alias Abbu Usman alias Salman Khan alias Avu Muzahid and accused Saeed alias Avu Rizwan alias Manu alias Farha Ulla alias Nisar Ahmed. He mentioned in his order that the tempo would be needed during the course of trial. He also mentioned in his order that technical examination of the tempo had been conducted and that the tempo had the marks of police firing.

The learned counsel for the revisionist relied upon the pronouncement given in Sunderbhai Ambalal Desai vs. State of Gujarat reported in (2002) 10 Supreme Court cases, para17 and argued that no purpose would be served by detaining the tempo at the police station and that it is being depreciated day by day.

On being asked he told that he lodged no F.I.R. against those two persons who forcibly took him in their custody and controlled the revisionist on the point of gun. After having heard the learned counsel for the revisionist and the A.G.A., I find no force in the revision.

The revision is, therefore, dismissed.

After dictation of the above order, the revisionist's counsel told that the terrorists have not been arrested so far. It is left to the liberty of the Magistrate concerned to pass appropriate order in appropriate circumstances.


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.