High CourtsSingle Bench

Kiran vs State Of Uttarakhand

Uttarakhand High Court · Decided on 14 February 2025 · Citation: (2025) 02 UK CK 1016

HON’BLE JUDGES
Ravindra Maithani, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Indian Penal Code, 1860 — Section 120B, 302
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
First Bail Application No. 1883 Of 2024
Ask AI about this case

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

9 paragraphs · 180 words

Ravindra Maithani, J

1.

Applicant is in judicial custody in FIR No. 02 of 2024, under Sections 302 & 120B IPC, Police Station Chakrata, District Dehradun. She has sought her release on bail.

2.

Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

3.

On 29.01.2023, at 5:00-6:00 early in the morning the informant was told that his brother has been killed and his dead body is kept in a room.

4.

Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that the applicant has not committed any offence. The role of hitting the deceased with danda has been assigned to the co-accused. Hence, it is a case fit for bail.

5.

Learned State counsel admits these facts.

6.

Having considered, this Court is of the view that it is a case fit for bail and the applicant deserves to be enlarged on bail.

7.

The bail application is allowed.

8.

Let the applicant be released on bail, on her executing a personal bond and furnishing two reliable sureties, each of the like amount, to the satisfaction of the court concerned.