Uttarakhand High Court
BA1/618/2011 of VIKAL Vs STATE OF UTTARAKHAND on 30 December 2011
COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Original Jurisdiction Dated: Nainital: the 30th day of December, 2011 First Bail Application No. 618 of 2011 Criminal Side Vikal S/o Shri Vinod R/o village Tejahera Police Station Chhapar District Muzaffarnagar …….Applicant (In Jail) Versus State of
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 30[th] day of December, 2011First Bail Application No. 618 of 2011
Criminal SideVikal S/o Shri Vinod R/o village TejaheraPolice Station Chhapar District Muzaffarnagar
…….Applicant (In Jail)
Versus
State of Uttarakhand
..…..Opposite Party
Arising out of Case Crime No. 18 of 2011Under Sections: 395, 397 and 412 of I.P.C.Police Station: Khanpur District: Hardwar Hon’ble Prafulla C. Pant, J.
Mr. Manish Arora, Advocate, present for the applicant.
Mr. M.A.Khan, Brief Holder, present for the State.
Heard.
Applicant– Vikal, who is in jail in connection with Crime No. 18 of 2011 ( Sessions Trial No. 161 of 2011), relating to offences punishable under section 395, 397 and 412 of I.P.C., Police Station Khanpur, District Hardwar, has sought his release on bail.
Learned counsel for the applicant drew
attention of this court to the copy of the statement of PW1 Moolchand recorded by the trial court in Sessions Trial No. 161 of 2011, wherein said witness has not supported the prosecution story as against the present applicant, and he has been got declared hostile. PW1 Moolchand appears to the star witness of the case with whom the incident of dacoity is said to have been taken place. He has stated before the trial court that the accused present in the court were not the persons who were involved in the incident.
In the above circumstances, without expressing any opinion as to final merits of the case, pending before the trial court, this Court is of the view that the applicant deserves bail.
The Bail Application is allowed. Let the applicant- Vikal, be released on bail on executing personal bond and furnishing two sureties, each of the like amount, to the satisfaction of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Hardwar. (Urgency Application No. 4840 of 2011 stands disposed of).
(Prafulla C. Pant, J.)
Dt.30.12.2011Nahid