Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

ZEESHAN versus STATE OF U.P.

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Zeeshan v. State Of U.P. - CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. 20799 of 2006 [2006] RD-AH 17202 (4 October 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 Zeeshan   indicted in case crime No. 165  of  1997 under section 356 I.P.C. P.S. Amroha Nagasr  District J.P. Nagar .

Heard Shri Atul Sisodia , learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A.  and have perused the record.

The learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant was arrested in case crime no. 167 of 2003 under sections 86, 307, 353 I.P.C. and section 25/27 Arms Act  P.S. Mandawali East Delhi and remained in Tihar jail in the said case. The learned counsel urged that on 8.6.2005 the applicant was produced before the court from district jail, Moradabad. According to the learned counsel the applicant being in jail since year 2003 to 8.6.2005 he could not attend the trial.

The learned A.G.A. submitted that applicant absconded from trial and the criminal case is pending for the last about nine years.

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

The abscondance of the applicant since 10.9.2002 does not appear to be deliberate. The applicant was firstly in Tihar jail Delhi and thereafter he was transferred to district jail Moradabad. In view of these facts, I consider it to be a fit case for bail.  

Let the applicant Zeeshan   indicted in case crime No. 165  of  1997 under section 356 I.P.C. P.S. Amroha Nagasr  District J.P. Nagar , be enlarged on bail on furnishing personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned.

Aks/20799/06

4.10.2006


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.