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
7 paragraphs · 287 wordsVivek Bharti Sharma, J
Delay Condonation Application IA No.1/2023 has been moved by the State for condoning the delay in filing the counter affidavit. Delay is condoned. Delay Condonation Application stands allowed. Counter affidavit is taken on record.
Applicant Rafeek, who is in jail in connection with FIR No.208 of 2022 for the offences punishable under Sections 307, 504, 506 of IPC and Section 25(1b)B of Arms Act, registered at P.S. Sitarganj, District Udham Singh Nagar, has sought his release on bail.
Learned counsel for the applicant would draw attention of the Court to Annexure-2 of the bail application, which is Medical/Supplementary Report of the injured Sajid Malik and would submit that the injured was discharged from hospital on 09.06.2022 in a satisfactory condition. He would further submit that the applicant is languishing in jail since 06.06.2022; that, charge sheet has been filed; that, nothing is to be recovered from the applicant/accused and there is no possibility of tampering with the evidence or influencing the witnesses by the applicant/accused; and that, the trial is likely to take considerable time.
Per Contra, Mr. Dinesh Chauhan, Brief Holder for the State opposed the bail application, however, he does not dispute the facts as stated by counsel for the applicant.
In view of the above facts, but, without expressing any opinion about merits of the case before the Trial Court, this Court is of the view that the applicant deserves to be enlarged on bail.
Bail application is, accordingly, allowed. Let the applicant be released on furnishing bail bond with two sureties in the amount of ₹ 50,000/- each and personal bond of the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court.