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

1996 Supreme(All) 1419

VIRENDRA SARAN
RAJESH GUPTA – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF U P – Respondent


VIRENDRA SARAN, J.

Heard learned counsel for the applicant.

2. Learned Government Advocate states that he has not received any instruc tions to oppose the bail application. Notice of the bail application was given on 1st December, 1998 and the case is from neighbouring district Sultanpur. It is yet another case in which the prosecuting agency has adopted a lethargic attitude in opposing bail application and I am not inclined to grant further time to the State. In a large number of bail matters instruc tions are not coming. It is for the con cerned police authorities to look into the matter and ensure that instructions are received by the Government Advocate in time. However, personal liberty of a citizen cannot be curtailed for the inaction of the prosecuting agency.

3. The facts and circumstances of the case go to show that the prosecutrix was having some affair with the applicant and she had written letter to the applicant that she had become pregnant. It further ap pears that the age of the prosecutrix is around 18 years. Epiphysis of the elbow joints had fused whereas epiphysis of the lower end of radius and ulra had not been fused. According to the table of fusions given in th





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