BA2/157/2010 of BIJENDRA SINGH GUSAIN Vs STATE OF UTTARAKHAND
Parties
- Bijendra Singh GusainS/o Sadhu Singh GusainR/o Balawala P.S. Raipur District Dehradun (PETITIONER)
- State of Uttarakhand (RESPONDENT)
Cites (1)
Statutes cited (13)
- indian penal code, 304b (1860)
- indian penal code, 498a (1860)
- code of criminal procedure, 207 (1973)
- code of criminal procedure, 313 (1973)
- indian penal code, 506 (1860)
- indian penal code, 304b (1860)
- indian penal code, 498a (1860)
- indian penal code, 304b (1860)
- indian penal code, 304b (1860)
- indian penal code, 304b (1860)
- code of criminal procedure (1973)
- indian penal code (1860)
- indian penal code (1860)
Full text
solid underline = linked page · dashed underline = case is in our corpus, page not published yet · dotted red = recognized reference, not in our corpus
IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
Original Jurisdiction
Dated: Nainital: the 23[rd] day of February, 2011Second Bail Application No. 157 of 2010
Criminal Side
Bijendra Singh GusainS/o Sadhu Singh GusainR/o Balawala P.S. Raipur District Dehradun
……...Applicant
Versus
State of Uttarakhand
…..….Opposite Party
Arising out of crime no. 179 of 2009Under Section: 498A, 304B, 328, 323 IPCP.S. Raiwala, District Dehradun
-_______________________________________________________________________
Hon’ble Prafulla C. Pant, J.
Smt. Pushpa Joshi, Advocate, present for the applicant.
Shri S.S. Adhikari, A.G.A., present for the State.
Applicant- Bijendra Singh Gusain, who is in jail in connection with crime no. 179 of 2009, relating to offences punishable under section 498A, 304B, 328, 323 IPC, P.S. Raiwala , District Dehradun, has sought his release on bail.
Heard learned counsel for the parties.
The first bail application was rejected as not pressed
on 20.05.2010.
The applicant is husband of the deceased. There is
specific allegation in the FIR that the applicant was beating the deceased soon before her death. The post-mortem report also discloses the ante-mortem injuries on the person of the deceased.
Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that
the applicant was on duty on the day when the incident is said to have been taken place. In this connection, she drew attention of this Court to annexure-4 filed with the affidavit which shows that the applicant was granted leave w.e.f. 02.11.2009 to 01.10.2009.
Having considered submissions of learned counsel for
the parties, and after going through the papers on record, this Court is of the view that it is not fit case for bail.
The bail application is rejected.
(Prafulla C. Pant, J.)