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
12 paragraphs · 206 wordsSudhanshu Dhulia, J. (Oral)
Heard Mr. Mohammad Matloob, Advocate for the accused applicant, and Ms. Pushpa Bhatt, Deputy Advocate General, for the State.
The applicant is in jail having been implicated in FIR No. 135 of 2018 for the offences under Section 3/7 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955
registered in the Police Station Banbhulpura, Haldwani, District Nainital.
Learned Counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. He further contended that there is no
independent public witness of the alleged incident and the recovery and the applicant has no previous criminal history and he is in jail since 27.7.2018.
Considering the overall materials presently available before this Court, prima facie the applicant has been able to make out a case for bail. The 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 in the like amount, to the
satisfaction of the Magistrate/Court concerned.
It is made clear that any observation made by this Court is only for the purpose of deciding the present bail application and the same shall not be taken
into consideration at all in any other proceedings.