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


Kamil v. State Of U.P. Through Secrtary (Home), Lucknow - CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. 19050 of 2006 [2006] RD-AH 16692 (22 September 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).


Court No. 47

Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 19050 of 2006

Kamil Vs. State of U.P. through Secretary)(Home) Lucknow

Hon'ble Ravindra Singh, J.

  Heard Sri V.P. Srivastava Senior advocate, assisted by Sri Arun Kumar and sri Lov Srivastava,learned counsel for the applicant; learned A.G.A. and Sri Raghuraj Jaiswal, learned counsel for the complainant

This application has been file by the Kamil in case Crime No. 353 of 2006 under section 147,148,149,307 and 302 I.P.C. P.S. Kairana district Muzaffarnagar.

The prosecution story in brief is that the F.I.R. of this case has been lodged by Irshad on 1.6.2006 at about 8.30  a.m. in respect of the incident which was occurred on  1.6.2006 at 5.30 a.m. The distance of the police station from the alleged place of occurrence is about 11 k.m. The F.I.R. has been lodged against the applicant and five other co-accused persons alleging therein that  the applicant other co-accused persons entered into the house of the deceased and committed the murder by using firearms.

It is contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that the alleged occurrence had taken place in the dark hour of night. Nobody has seen the incident. On the basis of the injuries present on the person of the deceased, it was mentioned in the inquest report that it is  six in number. The role of firing has been assigned to five accused persons. There is no motive or intention to commit the alleged offence even at the time of occurrence the first informant slipped away from the place of occurrence for the purpose of easing himself. Therefore, the applicant may be released on bail.

In reply of the above contention it is submitted by the learned A.G.A. that the role of firing has been assigned to the applicant. The F.I.R. has been promptly lodged and the murder has been committed inside the house.  The presence of the eye witnesses cannot be ruled out. Therefore, the applicant may not be released on bail.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the submission made by the learned counsel for the applicant and the learned A.G.A., and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case the applicant is not entitled for bail. Therefore, the prayer for bail is refused.

Accordingly, this application is rejected.

Dt. 21.9.2006



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.