Allowed

Sanjay Sharma v. State of Uttarakhand

Uttarakhand HC1 Apr 2013BA1/1421/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single judge allowed regular bail to the accused charged with murder, grievous hurt, and theft. The court considered the prosecution story suggesting the accused did not commit the murders but received looted items from co-accused, granting bail on a personal bond and sureties.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail on a personal bond of Rs. 50,000 and two sureties each of Rs. 50,000.

Sanjay Sharma Vs State of Uttarakhand — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Uttarakhand HC (2013)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL

¶2

Original Jurisdiction 1^st Bail Application No. 1421 of 2012 Order on the bail application of the accused.

¶3

Sanjay Sharma. …….Applicant (in Jail).

¶4

Versus

¶5

State of Uttarakhand. …......…. Opposite Party.

¶6

In case crime no. 246 of 2012 Under Section 302, 394, 411 IPC, Police Station Jwalapur, District Haridwar.

¶7

Present Mr. Manish Arora, Advocate for the applicant. Mr. M.A. Khan, AGA for the State of Uttarakhand. Mr. B.S. Adhikari, Advocate for the complainant.

¶8

Hon’ble Alok Singh, J.

¶9

Accused applicant has moved this bail application seeking regular bail in case crime no. 246 of 2012 under Section 302, 394, 411 IPC, police station Jwalapur District Haridwar.

¶10

Mr. Manish Arora, Advocate for the applicant, has vehemently argued that as per the prosecution story itself, applicant Sanjay Sharma neither entered into the house of complainant nor committed murder of Smt. Sunita Mishra nor committed any loot in the house of complainant. He further contends that after committing the loot and murder, other coaccused namely Jasvinder @ Tonu and Monu Mishra handed over the looted items to the applicant, therefore, no offence punishable under Section 394, 302 IPC is made out against the applicant, however, the only offence which can be said to have been made out against the applicant is offence punishable under Section 411 IPC. He further submits that applicant is in jail with effect from 25.07.2012 and he has no criminal history.

¶11

¶12

Learned AGA for the State of Uttarakhand also submits that applicant has no criminal antecedent.

¶13

Considering the facts and circumstances, in totality, bail application is allowed. Let the applicant be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- and two sureties, each of the like amount, to the satisfaction of the competent Magistrate having jurisdiction over the police station Jwalapur, District Haridwar. CRMA No. 37 of 2013 also stands disposed of.

¶14

(Alok Singh, J.) 01.04.2013

¶15

SKS

Sanjay Sharma v. State of Uttarakhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sanjay Sharma v. State of Uttarakhand

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

Joga Ram Vs State of Uttarakhand

Smt. Deepa and Ors. Vs State of Uttarakhand

Om Prakash Joshi and Another Vs State of Uttarakhand

Superintending Engineer and Another Vs M/S Aman Engineering Company

Manohar Lal Vs Balesh Prasad Jain

M/S Vision Metal Aids Pvt.Ltd. and Another Vs Employees State Insurance Corporation and Another