Dismissed

Chaman Lal v. State Of Uttarakhand and Another

Uttarakhand HC20 May 2013C482/488/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed the applicant to appear before the Sessions Judge by 31.05.2013 to oppose an application for bail cancellation. The court directed that if the applicant appears, the non-bailable warrant issued against him be kept in abeyance pending the decision on the bail application. The petition was finally disposed of based on these observations.

What did the court decide?

The petitioner was directed to appear by 31.05.2013; if he appears, the non-bailable warrant shall be kept in abeyance.

Chaman Lal Vs State Of Uttarakhand and Another — Bail and Remand | Uttarakhand HC (2013)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL

¶2

Criminal Misc. Application No. 488 of 2013

¶3

Chaman Lal. …….Applicant.

¶4

Versus

¶5

State of Uttarakhand

¶6

and another. …......…. Respondents.

¶7

Present:

¶8

Mr. Karan Anand, Advocate for the applicant. Mr. H.O. Bhakuni, Brief Holder for the State.

¶9

Hon’ble Alok Singh, J (Oral).

¶10

Perusal of the record reveals that petitioner was enlarged on bail, in case crime no. 267 of 2009 under Section 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC police station Kotwali, Dehradun vide order dated 23.12.2009 passed by Incharge Sessions Judge, Dehradun; an application under Section 439 (2) Cr.P.C. was moved by the Urban Cooperative Bank on 01.12.2010 for cancellation of bail granted to the petitioner vide order dated 23.12.2009. Record further reveals that notices were issued to the petitioner on the application seeking cancellation of bail, however, notice could not be served upon him, thereafter, learned Sessions Judge was pleased to issue non bailable warrant against the petitioner vide order dated 15.11.2010.

¶11

Mr. Karan Anand, learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that petitioner came to know about issuance of NBW recently and no notice was ever served on the petitioner, otherwise, petitioner would have appeared before the court below to oppose the application seeking cancellation of bail.

¶12

Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that petitioner shall appear before the learned court below on or before 31.05.2013 and shall file his objection against the application filed by the respondent Bank seeking cancellation of

¶13

¶14

bail, therefore, NBW issued against the petitioner should be cancelled / revoked.

¶15

Considering the totality of facts and circumstances of the case, I direct petitioner shall appear before the court below on or before 31.05.2013 and shall file his objection, if any, to the application seeking cancellation of bail. If petitioner appears and files objection, if any, to the application seeking cancellation of bail, order dated 15.11.2010 whereby NBW was issued shall be kept in abeyance and application seeking cancellation of bail shall be decided by the court below, at its own merit, in accordance with law, at the earliest.

¶16

With the above observations, this petition is finally disposed of.

¶17

(Alok Singh, J.) 20.05.2013

¶18

SKS

Chaman Lal v. State Of Uttarakhand and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Chaman Lal v. State Of Uttarakhand and Another

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

Ohm Prakash Vs State Of Uttarakhand

Wajid Vs State O Futtarakhand

Rajesh @ Raja Vs State Of Uttarakhand

Mobin Baig Vs State Of Uttarakhand

Girish Chandra Joshi Vs Jasvinder Singh

Prakash Chandra Tiwari Vs State Of Uttarakhand and Another