Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

ARVIND versus STATE OF U.P.

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Arvind v. State Of U.P. - CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. 16133 of 2006 [2006] RD-AH 14927 (31 August 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 (Mrs.) Saroj Bala, J.

This is an application for bail moved on behalf of the applicant Arvind involved in case Crime No. 36 of 2006 under sections 392, 411, I.P.C., Police station Gandhi Park, district Aligarh.

Heard Sri Akhilesh Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicants, learned AGA and have perused the record.

The learned counsel for the applicant submitted that cash of Rs.48,000/- was deposited in the bank on 6.2.2006 by co-accused Virendra and the learned Sessions Judge has wrongly mentioned that the said amount  was deposited  by the applicant. The learned counsel argued that recovery of Rs.11,300/- is said to have been made  from the possession of the applicant. The learned counsel pointed out that recovered currency notes do not bear any specific identifying marks.

The learned AGA submitted that the applicant and co-accused Virendra were arrested from the road outside  Malkhan Singh Hospital and recovery of cash of Rs.11,300/- was made from the possession of the applicant.

I have taken into consideration the submissions advanced on behalf of both the parties.

The recovered currency notes worth Rs.11,300/- do not bear any specific identifying marks. The cash of Rs.48,000/- was deposited  in the bank on 6.2.2006by co-accused Virendra. The case of the applicant is distinguishable from the case of co-accused Virendra. In view of these facts, I consider it to be a fit case for bail.

Let the applicant Arvind involved in case Crime No. 36 of 2006 under sections 392, 411, I.P.C., Police station Gandhi Park, district Aligarh, be enlarged on bail on furnishing personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned.

D/- 31.8.2006

Mahmood-16133-06

Hon'ble (Mrs.) Saroj Bala, J.

This is an application for bail moved on behalf of the applicant Praveen Kumar Jain involved in case Crime No. 51 of 2006, under sections 409, 467, 468, 471, 218 I.P.C., Police station Matsena, district Firozabad.

Heard Sri K.K. Dwivedi, learned counsel for the applicants, learned AGA and have perused the record.

The learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant was granted bail in case Crime No. 51 of 2006 under sections 419, 420, 34, 120-B I.P.C. by an order of this Court dated 26.7.2006 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 14659 of 2006. The learned counsel urged that the remand of the applicant for the offences under sections 409, 467, 468, 471, 218 I.P.C. was taken during the investigation and the applicant  sought bail in the added sections.

The learned AGA submitted that a large number of empty cartridges were found in the police armory in Agra. The learned counsel submitted that the applicant in collusion with co-accused removed the live cartridge from armory and replaced them  with empty cartridges.

I have taken into consideration the submissions advanced on behalf of both the parties.

The applicant having been enlarged on bail in the present case for the offences under sections  419, 420, 34, 120-B I.P.C. by an order of this Court  he is entitled  to bail under  added sections 409,  467,  468, 471, 218 I.P.C.

Let the applicant Praveen Kumar Jain involved in case Crime No. 51 of 2006, under sections 409, 467, 468, 471, 218 I.P.C., Police station Matsena, district Firozabad,, be enlarged on bail on furnishing personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned.

D/- 1.9.2006

Mahmood-18317-06


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.