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


Laddu v. State Of U.P. - CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. 1520 of 2005 [2005] RD-AH 3505 (24 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).


Hon'ble M. K. Mittal, J.

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

Accused applicant Laddu son of Mahendra Singh has prayed for release on bail in case Crime No. 172 of 2004 under Section 394/ 302/ 412 IPC, P.S. Sahawar, District Etah.

According to prosecution case, a Gumsudgi report was filed by the complainant regarding his brother Ram Veer on 24.6.2004. In the report it has been mentioned that his brother was driver of Smt. Sazida Beghum on Marshal Vehicle no. HR 16 B 9592 and had gone some where on 18.6.2004 at about 3 p.m. and had not come back. Subsequently a dead body was found on 19.6.2004 and post mortem was conducted of unknown person on 20.6.2004. The complainant came to know about the dead body on 26.6.2004  and then he went to Police Station and recognised the photo as of his deceased brother. Thereafter he lodged a detailed report on 27.6.2004 and in this report he has mentioned that on 18.6.2004 at 2 p.m. accused applicant Laddu and three others had come to his house and thereafter again come at about 3 p.m. in the vehicle and then they had gone. Prosecution case is also that the accused was arrested on 2.7.2004 and at that time Marshal Jeep was recovered from his possession.

Learned counsel for the applicant has contended that the accused has been falsely implicated in this case and that the applicant did not mention the fact. The applicant and others had come to his house on 18.6.2004 and had gone with his brother in the Marshal Jeep. He has also contended that recovery memo is also not reliable document and has been prepared only to  implicate the accused.

Learned counsel for the applicant has also contended that co accused has already been directed to be released on bail.

Considering the facts  and 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.

Dated: 24.9.2005



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.