This court allowed the bail application of the accused charged under various sections of IPC. The court imposed a personal bond of ₹50,000 and requires two sureties of similar amount to the satisfaction of the CJM.
Released on bail upon furnishing a personal bond of ` 50,000/- and two sureties of the like amount.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
Original Jurisdiction 1st Bail Application No. 883 of 2013 Order on the bail application of the accused.
Jagdish Prasad. …….Applicant (in Jail).
Versus
State of Uttarakhand. …......…. Opposite Party.
Present:
Mr. R.P. Nautiyal, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Prashant Khanna, Advocate for the applicant. Mr. R.K. Sah, AGA for the State.
Hon’ble Alok Singh, J (Oral).
This is an application seeking regular bail in case crime No. 156 of 2013 under Section 307, 504, 506, 427 IPC, police station ROP Dhaara, PS Kotwali, District Dehradun.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that as per medical report of the injured, injuries were found to be of simple in nature; co-accused Hemant Yadav has already been enlarged on bail by this Court vide order dated 03.07.2013; and charge-sheet has already been submitted in the matter.
Considering the totality of facts and circumstances of the case, bail application is allowed. Let the applicant be released on bail, on her furnishing a personal bond of ` 50,000/- and two sureties, of the like amount, to the satisfaction of CJM, Dehradun.
(Alok Singh, J.) 08.07.2013
SKS
2
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the applicant deserves bail in the present charge.
What conditions are necessary for granting bail to the applicant.
4 provisions across 1 enactments
Jagdish Prasad
State of Uttarakhand
Alok Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
