SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2007 Supreme(Del) 2162

SHIV NARAYAN DHINGRA
PHOOL CHAND – Appellant
Versus
STATE – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
Haneef Mohd, MANOJ OHRI

( 1 ) THIS application under Section 439 Cr. P. C. read with Section 482 cr. P. C. has been made on behalf of the accused, who is facing trial under section 307 read with Section 34 IPC and Section 302 IPC. The trial in this case is at fag end, all material witnesses have been recorded. The counsel for the applicant has relied upon statement of two witnesses and submitted that no role has been assigned to the applicant. However, there are other eye witnesses whose statements have been recorded and who have assigned specific role to the applicant.

( 2 ) CONSIDERING the entirety of the circumstances and the fact that the trial is almost at the last stage, I consider that it is not appropriate to grant bail to the applicant at this stage. The application is hereby dismissed.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top