Mukesh v. State
Case brief
What is this about?
High Court granted bail to petitioners facing trial for offences under Sections 366/376 IPC, admitting them to bail on furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 30,000 with two sureties in the like amount.
What did the court decide?
Petitioners admitted to bail on furnishing personal bond of Rs 30,000 with one surety each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Trial Court.
What the court decided
Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:AM UL YA
€)
under Sections 363/366/376(2)734 IPG registered at Police Station Sultanpuri. Status report is on record.
(2) I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have examined the file. The petitioners are facing trial for commission of offences under Sections 366/376 IPG. They are in custody since 27.02.2013. The case was committed to the Gourt of Sessions on 02.07.2013. Gharge could be framed against the petitioners after considerable period only on 25.08.2015. Notice issued to the prosecutrix was received back unexecuted.
(3) This Gourt had also issued notice to the prosecutrix for appearance on several occasions but she was stated to be not residing at the given address. It is informed that the petitioner Anand Mishra and the prosecutrix were acquainted with each other and had performed court marriage.
(4) Gonsidering the facts and circumstances of the case, the petitioners are admitted to bail on their furnishing personal bond in the sum of ?30,000/- with one surety each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Trial Gourt. (5) The applications stand disposed of. (6) Gopy of the order be sent to Superintendent Jail for information.
I^.P.GARG, J.
DECEMBER 14, 2015/sa
BailAppl.Nos.4l2/l5& 702/15
Issues for consideration
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioners should be granted bail.
Whether to admit suspects to bail on personal bond.
Parties & counsel
- applicant
Petitioners
- applicant
Anand Mishra
- respondent
Prosecutrix
Coram
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court