Dismissed

Kamla Kant v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC27 Feb 2023BAIL/3093/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bail application filed under Article 226 of the Constitution in a criminal defamation case under theft and Section 326 IPC and Section 302 IPC. The court examined the facts and held that the applicant's explanation was corroborated by evidence on record, which showed that he was not the person who was responsible for the alleged offence.

What did the court decide?

Bail denied; applicant directed to remain in custody pending investigation and inquiry.

Kamla Kant Vs State of U.P. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Court No. - 79

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 3093 of 2023

¶3

Applicant :- Kamla Kant Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Anil Kumar Pathak,Chandra Pratap Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Ajay Kumar Sharma

¶4

Hon'ble Dr. Gautam Chowdhary,J.

¶5

orZeku nkf.Md izdh.kZ tekur izkFkZuk i=] vkosnd deyk dkUr dh vksj ls eq0v0la0 326 lu 2022] vUrxZr /kkjk 147] 302] 201 Hkk0na0fo0] Fkkuk jlwykckn] ftyk dkuiqj nsgkr esa tekur ij eqDr djus gsrq izLrqr fd;k x;k gSA

¶6

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

¶7

vkosnd ds fo}ku vf/koDrk us rdZ izLrqr fd;k fd vkosnd dks bl izdj.k esa xyr o QthZ rjhds ls >wBk QWlk;k x;k gS] mlus dfFkr vijk/k dkfjr ugha fd;k gS] dfFkr ?kVuk dh izkFkfedh foyEc ls ntZ djk;h x;h gS ftldk dksbZ Li"Vhdj.k ugha fn;k x;k gS] vkosnd dks xkao dh nq’euh o ikVhZcUnh ds dkj.k jk; e’kfojk djds rax o ijs’kku djus dh uh;r ls bl izdj.k esa Qalk;k x;k gS] vfHk;kstu i{k }kjk ?kVukLFky fHkUu&fHkUu 3 LFkyksa ij crk;k x;k gS] vkosnd rhuksa ?kVukLFkyksa esa ls dgha ij mifLFkr ugha Fkk] vkosnd ij lkekU; vkjksi yxk, x, gSa dksbZ fu;r vkjksi ugha yxk;k x;k gS] vkosnd rFkkdfFkr ?kVuk ds le; ? kVukLFky ls dkQh nwj viuh nqdku ij Fkk] ?kVuk dk dksbZ Lora= lk{kh ugha gS] vkosnd funksZ"k gS rFkk og fn0 21&10&2022 ls dkjkxkj es a fu:) gS] blfy, vkosnd dks tekur ij NksM+ fn;k tk;A

¶8

ifjoknh ds fo}ku vf/koDrk ,oa fo}ku vij 'kkldh; vf/koDrk us vkosnd ds fo}ku vf/koDrk ds rdksZ dk izcy djrs gq, rdZ izLrqr fd;k fd vkosnd izFke lwpuk fjiksVZ esa ukfer vfHk;qDr gS] mlds }kjk lg vfHk;qDrx.k ds lkFk feydj ;kstukc) rjhds ls oknh ds iq= dh gR;k djds mlds 'ko dks ukys esa Qsad fn;k x;k gS] ihfM+rk us /kkjk 164 na0iz0la0 ds c;ku esa dgk gS fd og erd vafdr feJk ds lkFk I;kj djrh Fkh] tgka vafdr feJk dk ?kj gS ogha mldk ufugky gS ---------- Mzkboj gesa mlh taxy esa NksM+dj Hkkx x;k] eSa ogha iM+h jgh FkksMh nsj esa eq>s [kkstrs gq, vkseth o ujs’k jkBkSj vk x;s vkSj eq>s idM+dj fyfIVl ckx ds ikl ys x;s tgka ij vafdr feJk iM+k Fkk vkSj lHkh yksx ykr ?kwWlksa FkIiM+ ls ihV jgs Fks] mlh chp fd’kuiqj ds dqN yksx vk x;s ns[kus yxs rc mls ysdj vke ds ckx esa ys x;s tgka fxjkdj vkSj Nkrh ij p<+dj vkSj ogha ls gjk MaMk rksM+dj lHkh yksx [kwc fiVkbZ fd;sA bl izdkj vkosnd }kjk dkfjr vijk/k laKs; ,oa xEHkhj izdfr dk gS] blfy, vkosnd dks tekur ij u NksM+k tk;A

¶9

fo}ku vij 'kkldh; vf/koDrk ds rdksZ ds ifjisz{; esa i=koyh ij miyC/k lk{;ksa ds vk/kkj ij vkosnd dks tekur ij eqDr fd, tkus dk dksbZ vkSfpR; ugha gS rFkk ;g tekur vkosnu i= fujLr fd, tkus ;ksX; gSA

¶10

rn~uqlkj okn ds xq.k nks"k ij fcuk dksbZ fVIi.kh fd, gq,] vkosnd dk tekur vkosnu i= fujLr fd;k tkrk gSA fn0 % 27&2&2023

¶11

ds0lh0flag

¶12

Digitally signed by :- KAILASH CHANDRA SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Kamla Kant v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kamla Kant 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Akash Kumar Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Arun Singh Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Santoshi Devi Vs State of U.P.

Surendra Kumar Alias Shani Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Than Singh Vs State of U.P.

Deepak Patel Vs State of U.P.