Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

Pardeep Kumar Vs. the State

Pardeep Kumar vs The State

Type Court Judgment Court Delhi Decided Apr 06, 1983
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/685674

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Delhi High Court
Judge
Decided On
Case Number
Criminal Miscellaneous (Main) Appeal No. 269 of 1983
Subject
Criminal

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

- - He is charged with the murder of a girl with whom he was said to be in love. It is also stated that the incident was perhaps the result of an impulsive act of the petitioner who was deeply in love with thevictim. 10,0.00.00with two sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of the MetropolitanMagistrate.

Key legal issue
Criminal
Acts & sections
Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) , 1973 - Sections 439

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Pardeep Kumar

Advocate K.K. Sud and; S.T. Singh, Advs

Respondent

The State

Legal References

Reported In
24(1983)DLT71

Excerpt

- - he is charged with the murder of a girl with whom he was said to be in love. it is also stated that the incident was perhaps the result of an impulsive act of the petitioner who was deeply in love with thevictim. 10,0.00.00with two sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of the metropolitanmagistrate.h.l. anand, j.(1) petitioner is a young student of about 17-18 years of age. he is charged with the murder of a girl with whom he was said to be in love. he is at present on interim bail to enable him to appear at theexamination. he has remained on bail for a period of almost one month.the victim did not make any dying declaration. it is said that the only eye-witnesses to the crime are the brother and uncle of the victim and that there is no independent witness. it is also stated that the incident was perhaps the result of an impulsive act of the petitioner who was deeply in love with thevictim. the investigation has nearly concluded and the challan is likely to be put in court in the next few days. bail is opposed inter alias on the ground that the accused along with one or two co-accused was involved in another incident the same day but it is conceded that the name of the accused is not in the f.i.r. said to have been lodged in connection with the other incident. having regard to the tender age of the petitioner, the fact that he is on interim bail and all other circumstances, i direct that the petitioner be admittedwouldnotto bail on his furnishing personal bond in the sum of rs. 10,0.00.00with two sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of the metropolitanmagistrate. this would be subject to the condition that the petitioner would not leave the territorial jurisdiction of the court without prior intimation to the local police. the bail is subject to the further condition that wheneverrequired, the petitioner would appear before the investigation officer or any other authority in connection with the investigation or trial. dusty.

Full Judgment

H.L. Anand, J.

(1) Petitioner is a young student of about 17-18 years of age. He is charged with the murder of a girl with whom he was said to be in love. He is at present on interim bail to enable him to appear at theexamination. He has remained on bail for a period of almost one month.The victim did not make any dying declaration. It is said that the only eye-witnesses to the crime are the brother and uncle of the victim and that there is no independent witness. It is also stated that the incident was perhaps the result of an impulsive act of the petitioner who was deeply in love with thevictim. The investigation has nearly concluded and the challan is likely to be put in Court in the next few days. Bail is opposed inter alias on the ground that the accused Along with one or two co-accused was involved in another incident the same day but it is conceded that the name of the accused is not in the F.I.R. said to have been lodged in connection with the other incident. Having regard to the tender age of the petitioner, the fact that he is on interim bail and all other circumstances, I direct that the petitioner be admittedwouldnotto bail on his furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs. 10,0.00.00with two sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of the MetropolitanMagistrate. This would be subject to the condition that the petitioner would not leave the territorial jurisdiction of the Court without prior intimation to the local Police. The bail is subject to the further condition that wheneverrequired, the petitioner would appear before the Investigation Officer or any other authority in connection with the investigation or trial. dusty.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial