Uttarakhand High Court
BA1/1189/2003 of SUMIT AGARWAL Vs STATE on 24 December 2003
P.C. Verma, A.C.J. Heard Mr. U.K. Uniyal, learned Advocate for the applicant and learned Government Advocate. I have perused the record. The bail application of the applicant has already been rejected by learned Sessions Judge, Dehradun for offence under section 364, 364A, 368 I.P.C. in
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
BAI_1189_2003
Hon’ble P.C. Verma, A.C.J.
Heard Mr. U.K. Uniyal, learned Advocate for the applicant and learned Government Advocate.
I have perused the record. The bail application of the applicant has already been rejected by learned Sessions Judge, Dehradun for offence under section 364, 364A, 368 I.P.C. in case crime No. 337 of 2003 vide order dated 13.11.2003.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, in my opinion, it is not a fit case, where bail may be granted to applicant namely Sumit Agarwal. Therefore, application for for bail is rejected.
(P.C. Verma, A.C.J.)
Dt. 24.12.2003Gur