Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

NASEEM AND ANOTHER versus STATE OF U.P.

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Naseem And Another v. State Of U.P. - CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. 23390 of 2005 [2005] RD-AH 7869 (20 December 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

Court No. 19

Crl. Misc. Bail Application No.23390 of 2005

Nasem and another .....Vs.....State of U.P.

...

Hon'ble Alok Kumar Singh, J.

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. and also perused the material on record.

The applicant Naseem and Vikash Kumar are involved in case crime No. 456 of 2005, for the offence under Sections 419,420,467,468,471 I.P.C., and 3/7 E.C.Act, Police Station Tarya Sujan, district Kushi Nagar.

It is alleged  that 600 bags D.A.P. fertilizer was sent by firm M/s sheo Trading Company (non applicant) on the truck in question with the applicants as truck driver and cleaner for being delivered to the firm Mr. Ravish Kumar  and Manish Kumar (non applicants) Kushi Nagar. When the stock of the firm at Kushi Nagar  was checked  by authorities. It was found that there is no licence  for supply of the aforesaid fertilizer. Hence the report was lodged against both the firms and driver and cleaner of the truck.  On behalf of the applicants it is argued that they are mere driver  and cleaner of the truck being employees the firm. They are duty bound to  get the fertilizer unloaded at the distinction. They have  no criminal history against on their  credit.

The bail is, however, opposed by the learned A.G.A.

The points pertaining to nature of accusation, severity of punishment, reasonable apprehension of tampering with the witnesses, prima facie satisfaction of the Court  regarding  proposed evidence and genuineness of the prosecution  case were duly considered.

 In view of the entire facts and circumstances of the case, taking into  consideration some of the arguments, advanced on behalf of the applicant in respect of the points discussed herein above, without prejudice to the merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case for granting bail. Let the applicant be enlarged on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the concerned Court.  

 Dt. 20.12.2005.

Rkb.


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.