Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 4 of 4 (0.52 seconds)
Documents citing Israil And Another vs State Of U.P. And 5 Others on 26 July, 2019

Pradeep Kumar @ Pappu @ Bhuriya vs State Of U.P. on 1 July, 2025

L. J. 4232, Koppula Venkat Rao vs. State of Andhra Pradesh; (2004) 3 SCC 602, State of Bihar and others vs. Tabarak Hussain; MANU/BH/0131/1982, Ganga Singh vs. State of Madhya Pradesh; AIR 2013 SC 3008, Roop Singh vs. State of Madhya Pradesh; (2013) 7 SCC 89, Kalu Alias Laxminarayan vs. State of Madhya Pradesh; (2019) 10 SCC 211; Chaitu Lal vs. State of Uttarakhand; (2019) 20 SCC 272 and the judgment and order dated 12.11.2013 passed in Israil vs. State of Uttar Pradesh.; Criminal Appeal 40 of 2001; Neutral Citation No. - 2013:AHC-LKO:14455 by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court.
Allahabad High Court Cites 26 - Cited by 0 - R Kumar - Full Document

Vijay Prakash Shukla vs The State Of U.P. on 21 July, 2025

23. A coordinate Bench of this Court, in Israil vs. State of Uttar Pradesh; Criminal Appeal 40 of 2001, has held that for the commission of every offence there are three stages, the first is the intention to commit the offence, thereafter comes the preparation to commit the offence and third is attempt to commit offence. If the attempt succeeds, he has committed the offence, if it fails due to reasons beyond his control, he is said to have attempted to commit the offence. Attempt to commit an offence can be said to begin when the preparations are complete and the culprit commences to do something with the intention of committing the offence and which is a step towards the commission of the offence. The moment he commences to do an act with the necessary intention, he commences his attempt to commit the offence. Thereafter, considering several reports of the Hon'ble Supreme Court on the issue, the Court observed that in view of the case laws referred, it is clear that in order to hold the accused guilty of an attempt to commit rape the Court has to be satisfied that the accused, when he laid down the prosecutrix not only desired to gratify the passion upon her but that he intended to do so in all events, notwithstanding any resistance on her part. The Court after dealing with situation to the facts of the present case held that the conclusion is irresistible when the offence committed by the accused falls within the category of attempt of rape and it cannot, by any stretch of imagination, be said to be an offence under Section 354 IPC. The relevant paragraphs 14 and 21 are extracted hereinbelow:-
Allahabad High Court Cites 31 - Cited by 0 - R Kumar - Full Document

Abdul Rehman vs State Of U.P. on 2 December, 2019

The submissions of learned counsel for the applicant are that the applicant is innocent person and has been falsely implicated in the case, he is having no previous criminal history and in jail since 16.10.2019. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the present applicant is father of Israil, who has already been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 1.10.2019, passed in Bail No.9668 of 2019 (Israil Vs. State of U.P.). Therefore, his submission is that the present applicant is also entitled to be enlarged on bail.
Allahabad High Court Cites 9 - Cited by 0 - I Ali - Full Document

Isteyak Ali Alias Neta And Another vs State Of U.P. on 16 November, 2023

3. It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicants that the applicants have been falsely implicated in the present case. It is further contended that no specific role has been assigned to the applicants. It is also contended that the co-accused persons have already been enlarged on bail by coordinate Benches of this Court vide orders dated; (i) 02.08.2023 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.31518 of 2023 (Israil and another Vs. State of UP); (ii) 23.08.2023 passed in Criminal Misc.
Allahabad High Court Cites 13 - Cited by 0 - Full Document
1