Allowed

Jeetu v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC14 Sept 2021BAIL/23898/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court overturned a Lower Court's order detaining the petitioner in a 307 IPC assault case. It granted personal bail but stipulated that the trial court could occasionally re-detain him, justifying his continued trial necessity due to threats made by the incident's protagonist against the petitioner and his family members. Scheduled for September 14, 2021

What did the court decide?

Petitioner is granted bail with stipulation that trial court can occasionally re-detain him if essential for trial.

Jeetu Vs State of U.P. — Cheating and Forgery | Allahabad HC (2021)

¶1

¼U;k;d{k la[;k 69½

¶2

nkf.Md izdh.kZ tekur vkosnu i= la[;k 23898 o"kZ 2021

¶3

thrw &&&&&& vkosnd izfr

¶4

jkT; mRrj izns'k &&&&& foi{kh

¶5

ekuuh; 'ks[kj dqekj ;kno] U;k;ewfrZ ;g nkf.Md izdh.kZ tekur izkFkZuk i=] vkosnd dh

¶6

vksj ls eqdnek vijk/k la[;k 215 o"kZ 20209] vUrxZr /kkjk 307] 323] 325] 506 Hkk0 na0 la0] Fkkuk lgiÅ] ftyk gkFkjl esa tekur ij eqDr djus gsrq izLrqr fd;k x;k gSA

¶7

vkosnd ds fo}ku vf/koDrk] fo}ku vij 'kkldh; vf/koDrk dks lquk ,oa i=koyh dk lE;~d ifj'khyu fd;kA

¶8

la{ksi esa vfHk;kstu dFkkud bl izdkj gS fd oknh lquhr dqekj }kjk izFke lwpuk fjiksVZ fnukad 3&11&2020 dks Fkkus ij bl vk'k; dh ntZ djk;h x;h fd fnukad 2&11&2020 dks le; 7&00 cts 'kke vfHk;qDrx.k lqjsUnz Qjlk] thrw reapk] o jktohj cYye ysdj ,oa vU; lg&vfHk;qDrx.k jksfgr ykBh] misUnz] chuk o gseyrk vius gkFkksa esa M.Ms ysdj ,d jk; gksdj mlds ?kj ds vUnj ?kql vk;s vkSj vfHk;qDr thrw us tku ls ekjus dh fu;r ls reaps ls Qk;j dj fn;k tks oknh ds HkkbZ dh iRuh izfeyk iRuh /khjsUnz dks yxk ,oa oknh o mldh iRuh uhjt] HkkbZ /khjsUnz o vyksd ds lkFk ekjihV dh ftlls lHkh pksVsa vk;hA

¶9

vkosnd ds fo}ku vf/koDrk }kjk ;g rdZ izLrqr fd;k x;k fd vkosnd funksZ"k gSa mls bl izdj.k esa >waBk Qlk;k x;k gSA vkosnd us iz'uxr vijk/k dkfjr ugha fd;k gSA ;g Hkh rdZ j[kk x;k fd ;g dzkldsl gS ftlesa vkosnd i{k dh vksj ls Hkh pkj yksxksa dks pksVsa vk;h gS vkSj bl lEca/k esa Jherh gseyrk iRuh jktohj flag }kjk eqdnek vijk/k la[;k 235 o"kZ 2020] /kkjk 307] 147] 148] 149] 323] 506] 452 Hkk0 na0 la0 ds vUrxZr lkr yksxksa ds fo:} izFke lwpuk fjiksVZ vafdr djk;h x;h gSA ;g Hkh rdZ j[kk x;k fd lHkh pqVSyksa dh pksVsa lk/kkj.k izd`fr dh gSaA ;g Hkh

¶10

rdZ j[kk x;k fd vfHk;kstu dh vksj ls vkosnd dh rjQ ls vk;h gqbZ pksVksa dk dksbZ ftdz ugha fd;k x;k gSA vkosnd dk dksbZ vijkf/kd bfrgkl ugha gSA vkosnd fnukad 10&4&2021 ls tsy esa fu:} gSA ,slh n'kk esa vkosnd tekur ij eqDr fd;s tkus ;ksX; gSA

¶11

blds foijhr fo}ku vij 'kkldh; vf/koDrk }kjk tekur dk fojks/k fd;k x;kA

¶12

leLr rF; ,oa ifjfLFkfr;ksa dks n`f"Vxr j[krs gq, rFkk izLrqr ekeys ds xq.k&nks"k ij fcuk dksbZ fVIIk.kh fd;s esjs fopkj ls vkosnd dks tekur ij NksMuk mfpr izrhr gksrk gSA

¶13

rnuqlkj vkosnd thrw dk tekur izkFkZuk i= Lohdkj fd;k tkrk gSA mls mijksDr vijk/k esa fuEu 'krksZ ds lkFk lEcfU/kr U;k;ky; dh lUrqf"V ij O;fDrxr ca/k i= ,oa mlh /kujkf'k ds nks izfrHkw izLrqr djus ij tekur ij NksM fn;k tk,A

¶14

¼1½ vkosnd fopkj.k ds nkSjku lEcfU/kr U;k;ky; ds le{k mifLFkr gksxkA

¶15

¼2½ vkosnd xokgku dks fdlh Hkh izdkj ls izHkkfor ugh djsxkA ¼3½ vkosnd fopkj.k ds nkSjku Lkk{; ls dksbZ NsM NkM ugha djsxkA

¶16

;fn vkosnd }kjk mijksDr 'krksZ dk mYya?ku fd;k tkrk gS rks fopkj.k U;k;ky; dks ;g NwV jgsxh fd og vkosnd dh tekur fujLr dj ldsxkA

¶17

fn0& 14&9&2021@,l-okbZ-

¶18

Digitally signed by Justice Justice Shekhar Shekhar Kumar Yadav Kumar Yadav Date: 2021.09.15 15:56:25 +05'30'

Jeetu v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jeetu v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Prahlad Vs State of U.P.and Another

Sangram Singh Vs State of U.P.

Sarwar khan Vs State of U.P.

Chandrakesh Yadav Vs State of U.P.

Ranjeet Kumar Paswan @ Golu Vs State of U.P.

Ram Naresh Vs State of U.P.