Ved Prakash vs State of Uttarakhand

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2024 Supreme(UK) 49

RAVINDRA MAITHANI
Ved Prakash – Appellant
Versus
State of Uttarakhand – Respondent

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : Jitendra Chaudhary.
For the Respondent: Manisha Rana Singh.
For the Informant : Navneet Kaushik.

JUDGMENT :

RAVINDRA MAITHANI, J.

1. Since both these bail applications arise from the same FIR, they are heard together and are being decided by this common order.

2. Supplementary affidavit is taken on record. Miscellaneous Application IA No. 5 of 2024 stands disposed of, accordingly.

3. Applicants Ved Prakash and Mukesh Sharma are in judicial custody in Case Crime No. 462 of 2022, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 307, 120-B, 420, 504 and 506 IPC, Police Station-Jwalapur, District-Haridwar. They have sought their release on bail.

4. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

5. Applicants, according to the FIR, sold a property to the informant for Rs.13.75 crores. After the sale, the applicants raised some disputes, due to which some payments were stopped by the informant. Subsequently, the matter was settled, but still the informant was not allowed to take possession of the property sold to him. The FIR records that the applicants and others opened indiscriminate fire, but somehow, the informant could save himself.

6. Learned counsel for the applicants would submit that it is a property dispute; the matter has already been settled; the applicants may be released on bail

Click Here to Read the rest of this document