Sunday, 03, May, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

Naresh vs State Of U.P.
2017 Latest Caselaw 7231 ALL

Citation : 2017 Latest Caselaw 7231 ALL
Judgement Date : 23 November, 2017

Allahabad High Court
Naresh vs State Of U.P. on 23 November, 2017
Bench: Prashant Kumar, Raghvendra Kumar



HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
 
 

?Court No. - 16
 
Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 509 of 2014
 

 
Appellant :- Naresh
 
Respondent :- State Of U.P.
 
Counsel for Appellant :- Nirmal Singh Yadav
 
Counsel for Respondent :- Govt. Advocate
 

 
Hon'ble Prashant Kumar,J.

Hon'ble Raghvendra Kumar,J.

(Criminal Misc.Application No. 40634 of 2014)

The first bail application filed by appellant Naresh is moved by Sri Nirmal Singh Yadav Advocate and opposed by learned Additional Government Advocate.

It is submitted that there are general allegations against the appellant as well as co-convict and they have fired and due to the said firing one Ram Ji had also received injury, who later on died. It is further submitted that the appellant has no intention to cause injury to Ram Ji and, therefore, it is also not clear that Ram Ji has received injury  from whose firing. Accordingly, it is prayed that the appellant may be enlarged on bail.

Learned Additional Government Advocate opposed the bail prayer.

It is admitted position that co-convict, namely, Tara Chandra had also received injury while he was fleeing with the looted  bicycle. Thus it is clear that Tara Chandra had not fired the gun.

From the perusal of statements of  P.W.2 and P.W.7, it is clear that the firing  made by culprit hit the deceased Ram Ji. It also reveals from the record that the appellant has been apprehended on the spot and from his possession a firearm of 315 bore was recovered.  The doctor, who held autopsy on the deceased, has recovered a bullet from the body of the deceased. Thus it is clear that the firing was made from 315 bore gun which was possessed by the appellant.

Prima facie, it appears that the appellant is the main assailant of the deceased, hence we are not inclined to interfere with the bail prayer.

Accordingly, the bail application filed by the appellant Naresh is hereby rejected.

However, it appears that the appellant is in custody from 2009. Thus, Office is directed to prepare the paper book at the earliest and list this case for hearing.

Order Date :- 23.11.2017/Su

 

 

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : Smt. Nirmala Devi Bam Memorial International Moot Court Competition

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter