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

2023 Supreme(All) 429

DINESH KUMAR SINGH
Umakant Yadav – Appellant
Versus
State of U. P. – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
For the Applicant : Ram Pratap Yadav, Devbratt Yadav.
For the Opposite Party : Hanuman Deen Verma.

ORDER :

[Dinesh Kumar Singh, J.]

1. Heard Sri Amrendra Nath Singh, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Sri Ram Pratap Yadav, learned counsel for the applicant as well as Sri Hanuman Deen Verma, learned counsel for the complainant and Sri J.P.S. Chauhan, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State.

2. The present bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. has been filed seeking bail by the accused applicant in Case Crime No. 260 of 2019, under Sections 120-B, 454, 380, 447 I.P.C. and Section 3(2)(ka) of the Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, 1984, Police Station - Phoolpur, District -Azamgarh.

3. The F.I.R. in question got registered on a written complaint of Lal Chand Yadav S/o Ram Bujharat on 04.10.2019 on the allegation that on 27.09.2019 at around 5-6 p.m. on exhortation of present accused applicant, his sons, namely, Ravikant Yadav and Dineshkant Yadav and several unknown accomplices broke open the locks of Gandhi Ashram and stolen the government property and documents. The said Gandhi Ashram was constructed by funds given by the World Bank and mobilized by 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