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


Mehmood And Others v. State Of U.P. - CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 856 of 2006 [2006] RD-AH 13645 (18 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).


Hon'ble M. K. Mittal, J.

The appellants Mehmood, Rehmoo and Kurri have prayed for release on bail during the pendency of the criminal appeal no. 856 of 2006 filed by them consequent to their conviction in S. T. No.  283 of 2000 by judgement and order dated 14.2.2006 passed by Addl. Sessions Judge, Court No. 11, F.T.C. No. 2, Mathura whereby the appellants have been found guilty and convicted under Section 25(1)(a) of the Arms Act and have been sentenced to under go rigorous imprisonment for five years and fine has also been imposed on them.

Heard learned counsel for the appellants, learned A.G.A. and perused the record.

Prosecution case as is perceptible from the F.I.R. is that on 20.10.1995 the police party raided the place where these appellants and others were manufacturing arms unauthorisedly and these three persons were arrested whereas other four persons managed to escape. The finished guns and unfinished material and implements for manufacturing the guns were recovered at the time of the arrest of the appellants.

Learned counsel for the appellants has contended that the appellants have been falsely implicated in this case on account of enmity with the police and that they have been wrongly convicted without there being any legal evidence against them. As against it learned A.G.A. has contended that the accused were found running a factory for manufacturing of unauthorised weapons and there is no reason for false implication of the appellants and no enmity with the police personnel has been shown. He has also contended that there is no question of planting such huge quantity of materials allegedly recovered from all the appellants.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, but without prejudice to the merits of the case, and the fact that appellants were involved in manufacturing of unauthorised weapons, they are not entitled to be released on bail at this stage and that their prayer for bail is liable to be refused and is hereby refused.

Dated: 18.8.2006



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.