Rohit Pande v. State of Uttarakhand
Case brief
What is this about?
Hon'ble Justice Ravindra Maithani rejected the bail application of Rohit Pande, an applicant in judicial custody charged with attempted murder and arms offences, noting direct evidence of the incident by the victim and corroborating witnesses and dismissing arguments regarding minor injuries and weapon recovery.
What did the court decide?
The grant of bail was declined and the bail application was rejected.
What the court decided
HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
First Bail Application No.2337 of 2023
Rohit Pande ...Applicant
Versus State of Uttarakhand ...Respondent
Present:-
Mr. G.C. Kandpal, Advocate for the applicant. Mr. Vipul Painuly, Brief Holder for the State.
Hon’ble Ravindra Maithani, J. (Oral)
Applicant Rohit Pande, is in judicial custody in FIR No. 343 of 2023, under Sections 307, 504, 506 IPC, and Section 3/25 of the Arms Act, 1959, Police Station Ramnagar, District Nainital. He has sought his release on bail.
- Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
- According to the prosecution, on 27.07.2023, at 9:30 PM, the applicant opened fire at the victim and ran away.
- Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that the applicant was earlier also involved in some cases and in some of the cases, he has been acquitted and in some cases has been dropped by the court. It is also argued that according to the FIR, two fires were opened by
Issues for consideration
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the applicant is entitled to_RELEASE on bail in a case involving attempted murder and possession of arms based on the evidence of direct injury.
Whether the discrepancy between the number of shots alleged by the prosecution and stated by the injured witness warrants bail.
Parties & counsel
- applicant
Rohit Pande
- respondent
State of Uttarakhand
Coram
Ravindra Maithani
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
- Court
- Uttarakhand HC
- Decided on
- · December
- Registered
- Case no.
- BA1/2337/2023
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court