Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 3 of 3 (0.38 seconds)

Pratap Narayan @ Pratap Katiyar vs State Of U.P. And Another on 17 November, 2020

It is submitted by the learned counsel for the appellant that the appellant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case due to rivalry. He has not committed the present offence. Alleged offences are not attracted against him. Submission of learned counsel for the the appellant is that the appellant was summoned under Section 319 Cr.P.C.; the P.W.-1, Indrapal, in his statement has not assigned any role to the appellant; he has no concern with the alleged place of occurrence; there is major contradictions in the statements of the witnesses. It is next contended that the co-accused Kailash Singh has been granted bail vide order dated 12.6.2020 by co-ordinate Bench of this Court passed in Criminal Appeal No. 1116 of 2020 (Kailash Singh Vs. State of U.P. and Another). The appellant is in jail since 11.9.2019 and in case he is released on bail he will not misuse the liberty of bail. It is lastly submitted that the impugned order rejecting the bail application of the appellant suffers from infirmity and illegality warranting interference by this Court.
Allahabad High Court Cites 9 - Cited by 0 - U Kumar - Full Document

Kailash Singh vs State Of U.P. And 3 Others on 4 March, 2024

4. Since it transpires from the record that the respondents have not instituted any proceeding for cancellation of lease of the petitioner in compliance of the judgement and order dated 27.07.2009 of the revisional court in Revision No.79 of 2008-09 (Kailash Singh v. State of U.P.), therefore the action of the respondents in evicting the petitioner without adopting due procedure of law is illegal and cannot be sustained.
Allahabad High Court Cites 1 - Cited by 0 - S Srivastava - Full Document
1