Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

ASHOK KUMAR TIWARI versus STATE OF U.P.

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Ashok Kumar Tiwari v. State Of U.P. - CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. 4433 of 2005 [2005] RD-AH 5381 (9 November 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 Ashok Kumar Tiwari has prayed for release on bail in case crime No. 290 of 2004 under Section 302 IPC Act, P.S. Parashrampur, District Basti.

Prosecution case is that Smt. Sugna Devi was fixing a peg (khunta) on 6.2.2004 but the accused applicant Ashok Kumar Tiwari was removing the  same again and again on this Ashok Kumar Tiwari beat Smt. Sugna Devi sister of the complainant Shiv Kumar. Thereafter she telephoned the complainant to come soon otherwise Ashok Kumar Tiwari would killed her. After about two hours he received information that his sister had died. When he     reached her house villagers also told that Smt. Sugna Devi was killed by the accused applicant Ashok. Report was lodged on 7.7.2004 at 9.45 a.m.

The post mortem report shows that the deceased received a contusion 4 cm X 3 cm on top of the head and a deep contusion on the front of the Trachea larynx measuring 4 X 2 cm. Death was caused on account of asphyxia as a result of strangulation.

Learned counsel for the accused applicant has contended that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case but according to learned A.G.A. accused committed murder of Smt. Sugna Devi and there is sufficient evidence against him.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, accused is not entitled to bail and his bail application is liable to be rejected.

Bail application of the accused applicant 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 coercive steps against the witnesses, if necessary, to ensure their presence.

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

Dated: 9.11.2005

RKS/4433/05


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.