Allowed

Ravi v. State of Uttarakhand

Uttarakhand HC4 Mar 2021BA2/1/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed the second bail application of the accused charged under sections 302 and 307 IPC. The single judge held that material witnesses had been examined before the first bail application and there was no chance of tampering. As the co-accused with a similar role had been released on bail by the coordinate bench, the Court allowed bail on the ground of parity without going into the merits of the case, directing the applicant to execute a personal bond and furnish two reliable sureties.

What did the court decide?

The applicant is directed to be released on bail on execution of a personal bond and furnishing two reliable sureties.

Ravi Vs State of Uttarakhand — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Uttarakhand HC (2021)

¶1

SL. No	Date	Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures	COURT’S OR JUDGES’S ORDERS
	0 4 .0 3 .2 0 2 1		BA2 No. 1 of 2020 Hon’ble R.C. Kh u lbe, J. Mr. Vivek Shukla, learned counsel for the applicant. Mr. T.C. Agarwal, learned A.G.A. for the State. Accused- Ravi, is in judicial custody under Case Crime No. 230 of 2017, under sections 302, 307 read with 34 IPC registered at P.S. Pathri, District Haridwar has sought his release on bail. This is second bail application. First bail application was dismissed on 27.08.2018. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the accused that after rejection of the first bail application, statements of as many as eight witnesses have been recorded and there is no evidence against the accused. Apart from that, co- accused, namely, Nitin Kumar with similar role, has been enlarged on bail by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 20.09.2019 and; accordingly, accused is entitled for bail on the ground of parity. Per contra, learned State Counsel although opposed for bail but fairly admitted the fact that the role assigned to the accused is similar to the co-accused Nitin Kumar. In the present matter, the applicant is languishing in jail since

¶2

14.10.2017; the material witnesses
have already been examined and there is no chance of tempering the witnesses. Apart from that, the co- accused, having similar role, has already been enlarged on bail by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court. Accordingly, without going into merit of the case, it is a fit case for bail on the ground of parity. The bail application is allowed, and the applicant is directed to be released on bail on his executing a personal bond and furnishing two reliable sureties in
the like amount, to the satisfaction of the Court concerned. Pending application, if any, stands disposed of.
( R.C. Kh u lbe, J.) 0 4 .0 3 .2 0 2 1 Parul

Ravi v. State of Uttarakhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ravi 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Radha Devi Vs State of Uttarakhand through Secratary Home

Naushad Vs State of Uttarakhand

Mohit Vs State of Uttarakhand

Umesh Kumar Sharma Vs State of Uttarakhand

Kuldeep Vs State of Uttarakhand

Harvel Singh Vs State of Uttarakhand