High CourtsSingle Bench

Savej vs State Of Uttarakhand

Uttarakhand High Court · Decided on 30 October 2023 · Citation: (2023) 10 UK CK 0121

HON’BLE JUDGES
Alok Kumar Verma, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Code Of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — Section 439 · Indian Penal Code, 1860 — Section 34, 392
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
First Bail Application No. 2324 Of 2023
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

9 paragraphs · 308 words

Alok Kumar Verma, J

1.

Present Application has been filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for grant of regular bail under Section 392 and Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 in connection with the Case Crime No. 103 of 2023, registered at police station Shyampur, District Haridwar.

2.

As per the First Information Report dated 08.09.2023, informant Smt. Indu Devi was going on a motorcycle with her nephew Aman Singh. Three unknown persons came on a Bolero pik-up vehicle (UP12), snatched the chain from her neck and ran away.

3.

The said chain was recovered from the possession of the co-accused on the same day.

4.

Mr. Narendra Bali, Advocate, contended that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present matter. He is an innocent person. Test Identification Parade has not been conducted. The said chain was not recovered from the possession of the applicant. He has no criminal antecedents. He is a permanent resident of District Saharanpur (Uttar Pradesh), therefore, there is no possibility of his absconding, and, he is in judicial custody since 09.09.2023.

5.

Mr. M.A. Khan, learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail application orally. However, he has fairly conceded that the applicant has no criminal antecedents.

6.

Having considered the submissions of learned counsel for both the parties and in the facts and circumstances of the case, there is no reason to keep the applicant behind the bars for an indefinite period, therefore, without expressing any opinion as to the merit of the case, this Court is of the view that the applicant deserves bail at this stage.

7.

The Bail Application is allowed.

8.

Let the applicant –Savej be released on bail on his executing a personal bond and furnishing two reliable sureties, each in the like amount, to the satisfaction of the court concerned.