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
14 paragraphs · 284 wordsRavindra Maithani, J
Applicant seeks anticipatory bail in Case Crime No.164 of 2024, under Sections 307, 120B, 34 IPC, Police Station Kotwali, District Haridwar.
Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
According to the FIR, on 03.04.2024 at about 10:30 PM, some unknown persons opened fire in the house of the informant.
Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that it is no evidence case. The applicant has not been identified. Merely based on the statement of the co-accused, the applicant has been implicated.
Learned State Counsel would submit that the co-accused told to the Investigating Officer that it is the applicant, who had supplied the weapon of offence.
Having considered the entirety of facts, this Court is of the view that this is a case fit for anticipatory bail.
The anticipatory bail application is allowed.
In the eventuality of arrest, the applicant shall be enlarged on anticipatory bail subject to his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties, each in the like amount, to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer (“AO”). In addition to it, the applicant shall also comply with the following conditions:
(i) The applicant shall co-operate with the investigation.
(ii) The applicant shall not approach any witness, whatsoever.
(iii) The applicant shall not leave the country without prior permission of the concerned court.
(iv) The applicant shall deposit their passport with the AO. The passport may only be returned by the order of the court concerned. In case the applicant does not have passport, he shall give an undertaking to that effect to the AO.
(v) The applicant shall also give an undertaking on (i), (ii) & (iii) above.