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
10 paragraphs · 249 wordsRavindra Maithani, J
Applicant-Kapil @ Ravan is in judicial custody in Case Crime No. 298 of 2020, under Sections 394 & 411 IPC, Police Station Kankhal, District Haridwar. He has sought his release on bail.
Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
According to the FIR, on 13.09.2020 at 10:00 in the late evening, when the informant was taking cash to his office, suddenly three persons fired at him; attacked him; looted Rs. 20 lakhs and some documents from him.
It is the prosecution case that on 19.01.2021, the applicant was arrested with cash and some identity documents of the informant.
Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that it is a false case. Nothing was recovered from the applicant. The alleged recovery took place after a long. There has been no test identification either of the person or of any article.
Learned State Counsel would submit that it is a case of recovery of money and some identity proof of the informant. He admits that, as per instructions, there has been no test identification parade conducted.
Having considered, this Court is of the view that it is a case fit for bail. Accordingly, the applicant deserves to be enlarged on bail.
The bail application is allowed.
Let the applicant be released on bail, on his executing a personal bond and furnishing two reliable sureties, each of the like amount, to the satisfaction of the court concerned.