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
17 paragraphs · 267 wordsVinit Kumar Mathur, J
Lawyers are not physically appearing in the Court in view of the unprecedented situation being faced by the country due to pandemic of novel corona
virus (COVID-19).
S.B. Criminal Misc. Interim Bail Application No. 240/2022:-
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner’s wife is suffering from ovarian cyst and she has to be a/w connected matter]
operated upon. Therefore, it is prayed that the petitioner may be enlarged on interim bail.
Learned Public Prosecutor opposes the interim bail application. Learned Public Prosecutor on verification of the petitioner has not found assertion
made by the learned counsel for the petitioner to be correct. Learned Public Prosecutor further submits that there are other family members who can
take care of the petitioner’s wife.
Having regard to the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case and looking to the nature of accusation and gravity of the offence, without
expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I am not inclined to grant interim bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C. to the petitioner.
Accordingly, the present interim bail application preferred by the petitioner under Section 439 Cr.P.C. is dismissed.
S.B. Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 13649/2021:-
Learned counsel for the petitioner does not want to press the present bail application filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. on behalf of the petitioner at this
stage, however, seeks liberty to file fresh bail application after recording the statements of the Investigating Officer & Seizure Officer before the
learned trial Court.
Accordingly, the present bail application is dismissed as not pressed with the liberty as prayed for.
