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
9 paragraphs · 236 wordsRavindra Maithani, J
Applicant-Ravi alias Kallu is in judicial custody in FIR/Case Crime No. 72 of 2022, under Sections 394 and 34 of IPC, Police Station Kotwali Haridwar, District Haridwar. He has sought his release on bail.
Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
According to FIR, on 31.01.2022 at 5:35, when the informant was moving on his motorcycle, two persons tried to way laid them. The informant was along with a Sonu, who was on the wheels. The informant asked Sonu to accelerate the scooter. The miscreants tried to snatch the bag, but they could not.
It is argued that there is no evidence against the applicant. Nothing was recovered from him. There has been no test identification parade.
Learned State Counsel would submit that in this case, at the pointing out of co-accused, a country made pistol was recovered. She fairly concedes that no evidence is collected against the applicant. It makes out a case for bail.
Having considered the entirety of facts as discussed above, this Court is of the view that it is a case fit for bail. The applicant deserves to be enlarged on bail.
The bail application is allowed.
Let the applicant be released on bail, on his executing a personal bond and furnishing two reliable sureties, each of the like amount, to the satisfaction of the court concerned.