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
15 paragraphs · 270 wordsSudhanshu Dhulia, J. (Oral)
Heard Mr. Pankaj Kumar Sharma, Advocate for the applicant and Ms. Mamta Joshi, Brief Holder for the State.
The applicant is in jail having been implicated in Case Crime No.435 of 2017, which has been registered under Sections 323/376/452 and 511 of IPC,
at Police Station Kotwali Laksar, District Haridwar.
The first bail application of the applicant was rejected by this Court on 15.12.2017. Now the second bail application has been moved by the applicant.
The first bail application which was rejected on 15.12.2017, the counsel for the applicant was Sri Rajendra Singh Azad. Therefore, this Court on the
last occasion had asked Sri Pankaj Kumar Sharma, Advocate to request Sri Rajendra Singh Azad to be present before this Court. Sri Rajendra Singh
Azad is present before this Court and has very fairly submitted that he has no objections in the matter.
Considering the fact that the applicant is in jail since 12.10.2017 as well as the statement of the prosecutrix given by her under Section 164 of CrPC
which is somewhat contradictory to the statement of fact, prima facie, the applicant has been able to make out a case for bail. The second bail
application is allowed accordingly.
Let the applicant be enlarged on bail in the aforesaid crime on his executing a personal bond and two reliable sureties each of the equal amount to the
satisfaction of the Magistrate concerned/court concerned.
It is made clear that any observations made by this Court are only for the purposes of grant of bail. It shall not be taken into consideration at all in any
other proceedings.