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

2024 Supreme(P&H) 185

KULDEEP TIWARI
Rajender Yadav – Appellant
Versus
State of UT Chandigarh – Respondent


Advocates appeared:
For the Parties : Mr. Dinesh Maurya, Mr. Manish Banswal Addl. Public Prosecutor

Judgment

Mr. Kuldeep Tiwari, J.

Through the instant petition, the petitioner craves for indulgence of this Court for his being enlarged on regular bail, in case FIR No.111 dated 04.07.2023, under Sections 323, 342, 307, 506 and 34 of IPC, registered at Police Station Sector 31, Chandigarh.

ALLEGATIONS AGAINST THE PETITIONER

2. The prosecution agency was set to motion, on the statement of one Ramanand Yadav son of Sukhraj Yadav, and the crux of the allegations reads as under:-

“Statement of Ramanand Yadav son of Sukhraj Yadav resident of 1183, 3rd floor, Phase-2, Ramdarbar, Chandigarh age 48 years stated that I am residing at the above mentioned address in a rented accommodation alongwith my son Dhayan Yadav and I work of fiber work at Plot No.313, Phase-2, Ram Darbar Indl. Area and my son Dhayan Yadav also works in fiber work at Plot No 266. Phase 2 Indl. Area and he is unmarried. That on dated 03.07.2023 at around 9.25 pm, I and my son Dhayam Yadav were present in our room. My relative Rajender Yadav resides along with his wife and son Sarwan on the same floor. Noise of quarrel and abuses started coming from their room. On hearing the noise, I and my son Dhyan Yadav immediately went to

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