Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

KANHAIYA @ BRAHM PRAKASH versus STATE OF U.P.

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Kanhaiya @ Brahm Prakash v. State Of U.P. - CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. 6060 of 2006 [2006] RD-AH 18434 (1 November 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

Reserved

Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 6060 of 2006

Kanhaiya alias Brahma Prakash Versus State of U.P.

*****

Hon'ble  (Mrs.) Saroj Bala, J.

This is an application for bail moved on behalf of the applicant Kanhaiya alias Brahma Prakash arraigned in case Crime No.   394 of 2005 under sections 364, 506 I.P.C. Police station Billhaur, district Kanpur Dehat.

Heard Sri Rajiv Lochan Shukla, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Bijai Prakash Tiwari, learned counsel for the complainant, learned AGA and have perused the record.

The learned counsel for the applicant submitted that father of the applicant and complainant's father are real brothers and there is long standing civil and criminal litigations between the applicant's father and cousin brothers of the complainant in respect of  landed property. The learned counsel urged that the applicant has been falsely implicated by the complaint at the behest of his cousin brothers. The learned counsel submitted that it was quite improbable to abduct the child from congested open market place. According to the learned counsel there are no independent witnesses of the incident. The learned counsel contended that there is no criminal history of the applicant and he is in jail since December 30, 2005.

The learned counsel for the complainant and learned AGA submitted that the applicant took away the six year old child of complainant, who was coming home from  school and concealed him in the grove situated in a low lying area near the pond. The learned counsel urged that the name of the applicant was disclosed by the boy who was recovered within ½ hour of kidnapping. The learned counsel argued that charges have been framed by the trial court and there is likelihood of tampering with the prosecution evidence by terrorising the child witness.

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

The boy was recovered within ½ hour of kidnapping. The father of the applicant and complainant being real brothers both of them are close relations. Admittedly, civil and criminal litigations are going on between the applicant's father and cousin brothers of the complainant. Looking to these facts, I consider it to be a fit case for bail.

Let the applicant Kanhaiya alias Brahma Prakash arraigned in case Crime No.   394 of 2005 under sections 364, 506 I.P.C. Police station Billhaur, district Kanpur Dehat, be enlarged on bail on furnishing personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned.

D/- 1.11.2006

Mahmood


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.