Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

SURENDRA PAL versus STATE OF U.P.

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Surendra Pal v. State Of U.P. - CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. 5754 of 2005 [2005] RD-AH 3327 (21 September 2005)

 

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 M. K. Mittal, J.

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. and perused the record.

Accused applicant Surendra Pal son of  Vijay Pal has prayed for release on bail in case Crime No. 515 of 2004 under Sections 307, 302 IPC, P.S. Daurala, District Meerut.

Prosecution case is that the accused Surendra Pal is alleged to have shot dead his real brother Kunwar Pal on 22.11.2004 at about 6.30 a.m.. The F.I.R. has been lodged by another brother of the accused. According to the complainant he, his brother Kunwar Pal and his Bhabhi Smt. Mukesh were going to cut the sugar cane and at that time the accused came there armed with Tamancha and made indiscriminate firing at Kunwar Pal resulting in his death.

Post mortem report shows that deceased received as many as six firearm wounds of entry on different parts of the body, wadding pieces and 22 metallic pallets were also recovered from his body. In the statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C. Smt Mukesh, Bhabhi of the complainant has stated that the accused had Tamancha in both the hands.

Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the accused has been wrongly implicated in this case and these  fire arm injuries could not have been caused by one Tamancha or even by two Tamancha and it shows that the complainant did not see the incident.

Learned counsel for the complainant and learned A.G.A could not explain as to how these injuries could have been caused by Tamancha as alleged by the complainant.

In the circumstances of the case, but  without prejudice to the merits of the case, accused is entitled to bail.

Let the accused named above involved in above case crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two  sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Court concerned.

The applicant shall furnish an undertaking also before the C.J.M. concerned that he will not indulge in any criminal activity and will not cause either any threat or any physical violence to the complainant and the witnesses and their family members. If any such report is made by any of the above person either to the Court or the police, it shall be properly inquired into and if any substance therein is found, it shall be open for the court below to report to this Court so that his bail may be cancelled.

Dated: 21.9.2005

RKS/5754/05


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.