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

2006 Supreme(All) 455

VINOD PRASAD
BIJENDRA – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF U. P. – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
Amar Jeet, SUNIL KUMAR

( 1 ) CAN an accused be allowed to remain on the same bail bonds or furnish only fresh bail bonds for the offences triable by the Court of Sessions, if he was earlier granted bail for offences triable by the magistrate in the same crime number, is the question, which has been mooted in the present application for consideration by the applicants. As this question has burdened this court regularly, therefore, it requires determination. But before adverting to the aforesaid question a resume of the facts.

( 2 ) THE informant Manoj Kumar lodged a fir on 6-10-2005 at 10. 40 A. M. at the lice station Pahasu, district Bulandshahar, in respect of an incident alleged to have taken place on 6-10-2005 at 7. 00 A. M as crime No. 256 of 2005 u/s. 147, 148, 452, 323, 324 IPC. Two sets of siblings were arrayed as accused. Rohit alias Chhotu and gaurav are the sons of Shyam Lai and veerendra, Kalyan Singh and Shyam Lai are the sons of Mukundi Lai and all were said to be armed with pharsa, katta, hockey and lathi. It is alleged that on the date and time of incident Amar s/o Shyam Lai called the informant on the pretest of removing his car standard over his plot. There the accused persons started be


















































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