Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

RAVINDER versus STATE OF U.P.

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Ravinder v. State Of U.P. - CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. 9587 of 2004 [2005] RD-AH 4618 (21 October 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 Sri R. P. S. Chauhan, learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. and perused the record.

Accused applicant Ravinder son of Prithi Pal Singh has prayed for bail in case Crime No. 190 of 2003 under Sections 147, 148, 149, 302, 307, 452 and 504 IPC, P.s./ Kundarki, District Moradabad.

Prosecution case is that the accused in the night of ½-9-2003 at about 12.30 a.m., entered in the house of the complainant Akhilesh. At that time the complainant, mother, father and Bhabhi and sister were sleeping in the room. The door of the room was open and lamp was burning. Co accused Prithi Pal Singh started abusing the mother of the complaint and on this all of them woke up and said as to why they had come in the night. Co accused said that they had given evidence against them in the Court, although, they were asked not to do so. Thereafter Prithi Pal Singh, Ravinder, Jasveer fired at the mother of complainant and the other co accused also gave knife blows to the complainant and others. Complainant and his father also received injuries. His mother received three fire arm shots and died at the spot.

Post mortem report of Smt.Vimla shows that she received 3-4 entry wounds.

Learned counsel for the accused applicant has contended that the applicant has been wrongly implicated in this case but the contention of learned A.G.A. is that the applicant and co-accused fired and killed Smt.Vimla and also caused injuries to the complainant and his father and incident took place inside the house of the complainant and the presence of inmates cannot be doubted.

In the circumstances, but  without prejudice to the merits of the case, accused is not entitled to bail and  his application is liable to be rejected.

Bail application of the accused is hereby rejected.

However,  learned Trial Court is directed to expedite the hearing of the case and proceed under Section 309 Cr.P.C. It is expected that the accused shall cooperate in speedy trial. Learned Trial Court shall make every effort to conclude the trial within a period of three months from the date of receipt of this order. Learned Trial Court is further directed to take necessary coercive steps against the witnesses if necessary to ensure the presence of the witnesses.

Copy of this order be sent to learned Trial Court within a week.

Dated 21.10.2005

RKS/9587/04


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.