Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

SHARIF @ VEERAN & ANOTHER versus STATE OF U.P.

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Sharif @ Veeran & Another v. State Of U.P. - CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 2403 of 2006 [2006] RD-AH 12076 (24 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).

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ALLAHABAD

Hon'ble M. K. Mittal, J.

The appellant Sharif @ Veeran has prayed for release on bail in criminal appeal no. 2403 of 2006.

Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned A.G.A. and perused the record.

Prosecution case is that on 25.7.95 at about 9.30 a.m. Sanjay Saxena and Pradeep Kumar were at the shop of Master Akram and Rafi and Pradeep Kumar was working there and at that time Ubesh Kamal entered this shop being chased by the appellant and one Ateeq Ahamad co accused. They said that Ubesh Kamal should not remain alive and the appellant fired and the shot hit Pradeep Kumar and Pradeep Kumar was taken to the hospital but subsequently he succumbed to his injuries the same day.

Learned counsel for the appellant has contended that the appellant has been wrongly implicated in this case and that he had no intention to kill Pradeep Kumar. He has also contended that prosecution witnesses including the brother of the deceased have not supported the prosecution case and the tailor on whose shop the alleged incident occurred, has denied that he owns that shop.

Learned A.G.A. has contended that the witness Ubesh Kamal, P.W.-2 has stated prosecution case and has supported it and there is no reason to disbelieve him. He has also contended that the accused persons chased Ubesh Kamal and when he entered the shop to save himself, the accused fired and Pradeep Kumar who was sitting there was hit and subsequently died. The Investigating Officer interrogated Pradeep Kuamr in the hospital and he stated that the fire made by the appellant hit him when he was sitting outside the shop and was working. The investigating Officer has also proved that statement. On this basis, learned A.G.A. has contended that it cannot be said that the appellant has been convicted without their being any legal evidence.

In the circumstances of the case, but without prejudice to the merits of the case, appellant is not entitled to bail at this stage and his prayer for bail is liable to be rejected and is hereby rejected. If the appellant moves any application for expeditious hearing of the appeal the same shall be listed for hearing.

Dated: 24.7.2006

RKS/2403/06


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.