Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

RAM GOPAL & OTHERS versus STATE OF U.P.

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Ram Gopal & Others v. State Of U.P. - CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. 14137 of 2006 [2006] RD-AH 19210 (14 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

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

This is an application for bail moved on behalf of the applicants Ram Gopal and Mahesh involved in case Crime No. 89 of 2006 under section 386, I.P.C., Police station Sasni, district Hathras (Mahamaya Nagar).

Heard Sri G.S.Hajela, learned counsel for the applicants, learned AGA and have perused the record.

The learned counsel for the applicants submitted that complainant's wife having not delivered the gun to the applicants no case under section 386 I.P.C. is made out. The learned counsel argued  that the applicants are in jail for the last more than four months. The learned counsel urged that the applicants are on bail in the cases shown in the criminal history.

The learned AGA contended that the applicants made extortion demand of gun and threatened to kidnap complainant's son. The learned counsel argued that applicants being men of criminal antecedents they will indulge in the commission of other offences after being released.

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

The informant and his wife having not delivered any article or weapon to the applicants, I consider it to be a fit case for bail.

Let the applicants Ram Gopal and Mahesh involved in case Crime No. 89 of 2006 under section 386, I.P.C., Police station Sasni, district Hathras (Mahamaya Nagar), be enlarged on bail on furnishing personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned.

D/- 14.11.2006

Mahmood-14137-06


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.