Sanjeev Sharma vs State Of Uttarakhand & Others
2014 Latest Caselaw 2214 Del

WPCRL No. 462 of 2014
Hon'ble U.C.Dhyani, J.

Mr. Vipul Sharma, Advocate, present for the writ petitioner.

Mr. P.S.Soun, learned Deputy Advocate General, present for the State.

At the very outset, learned counsel for the petitioner did not press his criminal writ petition on merits and instead, made a prayer that the bail application of the petitioner be directed to be decided at the earliest.

Offences complained of against the petitioner are under Sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506 of IPC and Section 3 read with Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. Petitioner is husband of the victim.

Whereas the writ petition is dismissed as 'not pressed', it is provided that if the petitioner surrenders before the court below within ten days from today and seeks bail, his bail application shall be decided as expeditiously as possible and without unreasonable delay.

It is directed that no coercive measures shall be adopted against the writ petitioner for next ten days i.e. up to 10.05.2014.

(U.C.Dhyani, J.) 01.05.2014 Kaushalp