✦ Uttarakhand High Court

Judgment · High Court

PRAFULLA C PANT

Case at a glance

Outcome

Bail refused

The bail Application is rejected

Provisions considered

Judgment

Operative part

Dated: Nainital: the 15th Day of February, 2011. First Bail Application No. 1103 of 2010 Order on the Bail Application: CRIMINAL SIDE Ranjeet Singh S/o Shri Dalip Singh R/o Village Dhungi, Revenue Police Area Gosil, Patti-Bangarh, Tehsil Devprayag District Tehri Garhwal ….….Applicant(In Jail) State of Uttarakhand Versus ………..Opposite Party Arising out of Case Crime No. 01 of 2009 Under Section: 498A, 364A, I.P.C, and one punishable under section ¾ Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961. Gosil Bangarh Tehri Garhwal Police Station: District: Hon’ble Prafulla C. Pant, J. Mr. Sandeep Kothari, Advocate, present for the applicant. Mr. M.A.Khan, Brief Holder, Present for the State. Applicant Ranjeet Singh, who is in jail in connection 2 with Case Crime No. 01 of 2009, relating to offences punishable Under Sections 498A, 364A, I.P.C., and one punishable under section ¾ of Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961, Police Station Patwari Circle, Gosil Bangarh, District Tehri Garhwal, has sought his release on bail. Heard. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that applicant's wife Reena left her husband's house and the applicant is innocent and he has no knowledge of where abouts of his wife. However, it appears that the applicant never lodged any report relating to missing of his wife from his house. After perusal of the First Information Report lodged by father in law of the applicant and after going through the statements of the witnesses who were neighbours of the applicant in Punjab, this court is not inclined to grant the bail. The bail Application is rejected. (Urgency Application No. 788 of 2011stands disposed of). Dt. 15.02.2011 NP (Prafulla.C.Pant.,J)

Questions this judgment answers

What did the Court decide in this case?

The Court recorded the following disposition: The bail Application is rejected

Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?

Indian Penal Code, 1860 — ss. 364A, 498A; Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961.

Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case

No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.

This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.

Why is this linked?

This is the original judgment text, reproduced from the public court record. Always verify it against the official record before relying on it in a filing — check it on Uttarakhand High Court or eCourts case status. ← Search more judgments