High CourtsSingle Bench

Rajesh vs State

Delhi High Court · Decided on 28 February 1997 · Citation: (1997) 3 AD 689 : (1997) 66 DLT 791

HON’BLE JUDGES
Mohd. Shamim, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Section 439
CASE NUMBER
Civil Miscellaneous (Main) Appeal No. 303 of 1997
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

2 paragraphs · 166 words

Mohd. Shamim, J.

(1) This is an application by the petitioner for release on bail. Learned Counsel for the petitioner has contended that the petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. There is absolutely no evidence against the petitioner. Uma Kant, Public Witness Public Witness 1 himself lodged report with the police with regard to the missing of the deceased. There is no mention in the said report about the petitioner as the person who took away the deceased. Petitioner has been in custody since 6th August, 1996. Learned P.P. on the other hand contended that Smt. Rani and Uma Kant saw the petitioner taking away the deceased from his house. Considering the above facts and circumstances I think the present case is a fit case for bail. Let the petitioner be released on bail of his furnishing a surety in the sum of Rs. 20,000.00 with a personal bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Court concerned.