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
12 paragraphs · 253 wordsRavindra Maithani, J
Applicants Saddam, Mohseen and Haseen seek anticipatory bail in Case Crime No.0181 of 2016, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 504, 506, 452 and 436 IPC, Police Station Manglaur, District Haridwar.
Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
It is argued by learned counsel for the applicants that co-accused, having similar role, has already been granted anticipatory bail by this Court.
This fact is admitted by learned State Counsel.
Having considered, this Court is of the view that this is a case, in which the applicants should be granted anticipatory bail. The instant anticipatory bail application deserves to be allowed.
The anticipatory bail application is allowed.
In the eventuality of arrest, the applicants shall be enlarged on bail on their furnishing a personal bond with two sureties, each in the like amount, by each one of them, to the satisfaction of the court concerned. In addition to it, the applicants shall also comply with the following conditions:-
(i) The applicants shall not approach any witness in any manner, whatsoever.
(iii) The applicants shall not leave the country without prior permission of the court concerned.
(iii) The applicants shall deposit their passports with the court concerned. The passports may only be returned by the order of the court concerned. In case the applicants do not have passport, they shall give an undertaking to that effect to the court concerned.
(iv) The applicant shall also give an undertaking on (i), & (ii) above.