Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

YASHPAL & OTHERS versus STATE OF U.P.

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Yashpal & Others v. State Of U.P. - CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 6582 of 2006 [2006] RD-AH 18687 (3 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 R.K.Rastogi,J.

Heard.

The appeal appears to be arguable.

Admit.

Summon the lower court record.

Heard  the  learned counsel  for the appellants as well as the learned A.G.A. for the State on the  prayer of bail.

The appellant, Yashpal  has been convicted  under section 307/34 by Addl. Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court No.2, Jalaun at Orai in Session Trial No.168 of 2005 ( State Vs. Mohar Singh and others) vide judgment and order dated 30.10.2006 and has been sentenced to 7 years R.I. and to a fine of Rs.5000/-. The allegation against him is that  he was armed with pistol at the time of incident and had fired  at the cousin brother of the informant but the fire did not hit  any one. The remaining accused-appellants,i.e. Hukum Singh and Mohar Singh have been convicted by the said court under section 307/34 I.P.C. and sentenced to seven years R.I. and a fine of Rs.5000/- each and they have also been convicted under section 323 I.P.C. and sentenced  to one year R.I. each. The allegation against them is that they were armed with lathis at the time of incident and had caused injuries to Ramapati by those lathis. A perusal of the injury report  of Ramapati reveals that injuries no. 3 to 6 were caused by blunt object and were simple in nature.

Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I am of the view that the appellants  deserve to be  bailed  out during   pendency of this appeal.

Let the appellants named above be released on bail in the aforesaid case on  their each executing a personal bond and furnishing two sureties  to the satisfaction of the   Chief  Judicial Magistrate concerned during pendency of this appeal.

Realization of fine  shall also remain stayed during the pendency of the  appeal.

Dated:3.11.2006

RPP/Crl.Appeal 6582/06


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.