AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
11 paragraphs · 205 wordsRajan Gupta, J.—This is a petition u/s 439 Cr.P.C. seeking regular bail in a case registered against the petitioner under Sections
364A/384/120B/34 IPC vide FIR No. 12 dated 10.1.2010 at police station Civil Lines, Patiala.
Learned Counsel for the petitioner has argued that petitioner was not named in the FIR, no recovery has been effected from him and thus, he is
entitled to be enlarged on bail.
I have heard learned Counsel for the petitioner.
The FIR was lodged by one Kaushal Yadav. He stated therein that his son aged about 1� years old was taken by co-accused of the
petitioner with the promise of getting him some toffee, etc. However, son of the complainant was kidnapped. The complainant contacted co-
accused Jasin Khan on telephone and the latter demanded a ransom of Rs. 3,00,000/ -, failing which child would be killed. The matter was
reported to the police, raid was conducted and child was recovered. Petitioner was accompanying the other accused when raid was conducted.
In view of seriousness of allegations and nature of crime, I am of the considered view that petitioner is not entitled to concession of bail. The
petition is devoid of merit and is hereby dismissed.