Uttarakhand High Court
BA1/1119/2002 of LALIT SINGH THAPA and ORS. Vs STATE on 20 November 2002
HIGH COURT OF UTTARANCHAL AT NAINITAL. Original Jurisdiction Dated: Nainital the 20th day of October ,2002 Criminal Misc. Bail Application Number 1119of 2002 Order on the Bail Application CRIMINAL SIDE (1)Lalit Singh Thapa son of Sri Joga Singh Thapa, (2) Sunil Singh Thapa son of Sri Devendra
IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARANCHAL AT NAINITAL.
Original Jurisdiction
Dated: Nainital the 20th day of October ,2002
Criminal Misc. Bail Application Number 1119of 2002
Order on the Bail Application
CRIMINAL SIDE
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.
(1) Lalit Singh Thapa son of Sri Joga Singh Thapa, (2) Sunil Singh Thapa son of Sri Devendra Singh, both residents of village Batholi, Patti Kharkdoli, Tehsil and District Pithoragarh and (3) Kishan Singh son of Sri Amar Singh, resident of village Dole, Patti Kharkdoli, Patti Kharkdoli, Tehsil and District Pithoragarh
....................Applicant(s)
Versus
State of Uttaranchal. ..........................Opposite Party ________________________________________________________________________
Arising out of- Case crime no.1 of 2002, Under sections 302/201/120-B of I.P.C., Patti Kharkdoli, District Pithoragarh ________________________________________________________________________
By the Court
Hon'ble Irshad Hussain, J.
Heard the learned counsel for the applicant and the learned Additional Government Advocate.
There is allegation of conspiracy in the murder of Prakash Gurang and applicants- Government Advocate.
There is allegation of conspiracy in the murder of Prakash Gurang and applicants- accused are also said to be the conspirators in the crime. The applications of the two co- accused have been rejected by the Court earlier and from the material on record no distinction could be made regarding the role assigned to the applicants-accused and those accused whose bail applications have been rejected by the Court. It is a murder case. Considering this, in my opinion it is not a fit case for bail.
Rejected.
(Irshad Hussain, J.)
20.11.2002./B.