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


Naseeem And Others v. State Of U.P. - CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 4509 of 2005 [2006] RD-AH 11430 (13 July 2006)


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 Mukteshwar Prasad, J.

Hon'ble Vinod Prasad, J.

We have heard learned counsel for the appellants, Sri Pankaj Bharti, learned counsel for the complainant and learned A.G.A. We have also gone through the impugned judgment as well as trial court record.

It is contended that co-accused Sharif was bailed out by this Court on 19.10.2005. So far as remaining three appellants are concerned, they are said to have assaulted the deceased with their knives. However, the doctor who conducted autopsy found two injuries only on the chest. It is also contended that P.W. 2 Saeed, who is father of the deceased, was said to have accompanied him disclosed that Naseem did not succeed in causing any injury. It is also contended that all the three appellants were on bail during trial and they did not misuse the liberty of bail. It is also contended that F.I.R. is highly belated.

It was contended on behalf of the complainant that P.W. 1 Saeed took his son to the hospital in a Jeep and thereafter, the F.I.R. was lodged.

Having considered the submissions made on behalf of parties and facts and circumstances of the case, we are of the opinion that appellant no. 1 Naseem deserves bail.

Let appellant no. 1 Naseem be released on bail during pendency of the appeal in S.T. No. 270 of 2000 on his executing a personal bond and furnishing two sureties, each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the C.J. M.  Muzaffarnagar. The recovery of fine shall remain stayed during the pendency of the appeal.

The Chief Judicial Magistrate will send photocopies of the bail bonds to the Court immediately.

So far as appellant nos. 2 and 3, Washim and Nabab are concerned, we do not find any reason to enlarge them on bail. Their prayer for bail is rejected.

Dated: 13.7.2006

SU. 4509-05


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.