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.

Mohd. Lias Vs. State

Mohd. Lias vs State

Type Court Judgment Court Delhi Decided May 24, 1993
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/693249

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. 682 of 1993
Subject
Criminal

Case Summary

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

- - 15.000.00 with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Court concerned.

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

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Mohd. Lias

Advocate P.K. Bhardwaj,; A.K. Sharma and; H.P. Sharma, Advs

Respondent

State

Legal References

Cases Referred
and Ram Inder v. State.
Reported In
1994CriLJ1436; 51(1993)DLT89

Excerpt

- - 15.000.00 with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned.sat pal, j.(1) this is petition for grant of bail under section 439 of code of criminal procedure.(2) mr. bhardwaj, the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is a juvenile as defined in the juvenile justice act (in shortact) and as such he was entitled to be released on bail, as his case does not fall under any of the exceptions mentioned in section ) 8 of the act. in support of his contention learned counsel placed reliance on two judgments of this court reported in the case of arjun v. the state, : 24(1983)dlt65 and ram inder v. state. 1 (1992) ccr 918. learned counsel for the petitioner also submitted that the petitioner was not a previous convict.(3) mr. h.p. sharma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the state could not point out any fact to show that the present case falls under any of the exceptions mentioned in section 18 of the act.(4) keeping in view the aforesaid circumstances, i am of the opinion that it is a fit case for grant of bail to the petitioner. accordingly, i direct that the petitioner be released on bail on his furnishing a bail bond in the sum of rs. 15.000.00 with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned.with this order petition stands disposed of. dusty.

Full Judgment

Sat Pal, J.

(1) This is petition for grant of Bail under Section 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure.

(2) Mr. Bhardwaj, the learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is a juvenile as defined in the Juvenile Justice Act (in shortAct) and as such he was entitled to be released on bail, as his case does not fall under any of the exceptions mentioned in Section ) 8 of the Act. In support of his contention learned Counsel placed reliance on two judgments of this Court reported in the case of Arjun v. The State, : 24(1983)DLT65 and Ram Inder v. State. 1 (1992) Ccr 918. Learned Counsel for the petitioner also submitted that the petitioner was not a previous convict.

(3) Mr. H.P. Sharma, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the State could not point out any fact to show that the present case falls under any of the exceptions mentioned in Section 18 of the Act.

(4) Keeping in view the aforesaid circumstances, I am of the opinion that it is a fit case for grant of bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, I direct that the petitioner be released on bail on his furnishing a bail bond in the sum of Rs. 15.000.00 with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Court concerned.With this order petition stands disposed of. dusty.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial