Uttarakhand High Court
BA2/179/2010 of JAI PRAKASH Vs STATE OF UTTARAKHAND on 31 December 2010
COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Original Jurisdiction Dated: Nainital: the 31st day of December, 2010 Second Bail Application No.179 of 2010 Criminal Side Jai Prakash S/o Prem Chandra R/o C-235, Raghuveer Nagar, Rajori Garden P.S. Khayala, New Delhi …..…...Applicant ( in Jail)
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.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
Original Jurisdiction
Dated: Nainital: the 31[st] day of December, 2010Second Bail Application No.179 of 2010
Criminal SideJai PrakashS/o Prem ChandraR/o C-235, Raghuveer Nagar, Rajori Garden P.S. Khayala, New Delhi
…..…...Applicant ( in Jail)
Versus
State of Uttarakhand
…..….Opposite Party
Arising out of case crime no. 77 of 2010Under section : 498A, 304B I.P.C.,and ¾ Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961.P.S. Rishikesh, District Dehradun -________________________________________________________________________
Hon’ble Prafulla C. Pant, J
Shri Sandeep Kothari, Advocate, present for the applicant.
Shri M.A. Khan, Brief Holder, present for the State.
Applicant- Jai Prakash, who is in jail in connection with crime no. 77 of 2010, relating to offence punishable under section 498A, 304B IPC, and one punishable under section ¾ Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961, P.S. Rishikesh, District Dehradun, (Sessions Trial no. 84 of 2010, State vs. Jai Prakash and another, pending in the court of Additional Sessions Judge, Rishikesh), has sought his release on bail.
Heard learned counsel for the parties.
The first bail application was rejected on merits on 25.08.2010.
Applicant is husband. Unnatural death of his wife occurred within nine months of marriage. Suicide note is also said to have been left by the deceased. There are allegations made by the complainant regarding demand of dowry and harassment.
In the above circumstances, this Court does not find any new ground to grant bail. The second bail application is rejected.
(Prafulla C. Pant, J.)
Dt. 31.12.2010Parul