Bail application by an accused arrested for kidnapping a child under Sections 363-A/34 IPC. The child was recovered from the applicant and a co-accused during investigation; no test identification parade was conducted and the applicant was not named in the FIR. The court held no case for bail was made out and rejected the application.
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.
| SL. No |
Date | Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures |
COURT’S OR JUDGES’S ORDERS 2025:UHC:2494 |
|---|---|---|---|
| BA 1stNo.1503 of 2024 Hon’ble Ashish Naithani, J. Mr. Bhuvnesh Joshi, learned counsel for the applicant. 2. Mr. Vipul Painuly, learned Brief Holder for the State of Uttarakhand. 3. The present bail application has been moved on behalf of the applicant, Devndra Kumar, S/o Sri Surajmal, R/o Jadbad (Jarvar) Meeranpur, Police Station Kakrauli, District Muzaffarnagar, U.P. The applicant is presently in judicial custody in connection with FIR/Case Crime No.0293 of 2024, registered at Police Station Kotwali Haridwar, District Haridwar, under Sections 363-A/34 of IPC. He has sought his release on bail. 4. The facts of the case are that one Smt. Neetu Devi W/o Chotu Das, lodged an FIR against the unknown persons alleging that her Ankush, was taken away by someone. During the course of investigation, the applicant was arrested. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has falsely been implicated in the present matter; the applicant was not named in the FIR; the applicant is in jail since 12.04.2024. He further submits that no identification test parade was ever been conducted by the prosecution; the applicant has no previous criminal history. |
| 6. _Per contra,_learned State Counsel submits that |
|---|
| applicant and co-accused on 09.04.2024, from_“Nightghat,_ |
| Har ki Pairi” had kidnapped the son of the complainant, and during the course of investigation on 12.04.2024, the son of the complainant was recovered from the possession of the applicant and co-accused, and therefore, he submits that this is a serious offence, and bail may not be granted to the applicant. |
| 7. Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is of the view that the applicant has not made out a case for bail. |
| 8. Accordingly, the bail application is rejected. |
| (Ashish Naithani, J) |
| 02.04.2025 Nitesh/ |
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the applicant accused under Sections 363-A/34 IPC of kidnapping a minor was entitled to bail.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Devndra Kumar
State of Uttarakhand
Ashish Naithani
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
