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.

Maya Ram, and Others. Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh (U.P.).

Maya Ram, and Others. vs State of Uttar Pradesh (U.P.).

Type Court Judgment Court Allahabad Decided Aug 02, 2010
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/912284

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
Allahabad High Court
Judge
Decided On
Case Number
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 20021 of 2010
Subject
Criminal

Case Summary

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

Prayer: Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of Constitution of India against the order dated 25.02.2004 made in R.E.A.No.954 of 1995 in REP.No.1/93 by the Hon'ble Additional Sub-Judge, Salem, dismissing the petition filed by the petitioner herein seeking to implead themselves in the execution proceedings...

Key legal issue
Criminal
Acts & sections
Indian Penal Code (IPC) - Sections 304, 323, 504

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Maya Ram, and Others.

Advocate V.K. Sharma; S.K. Mathur, Advs.

Respondent

State of Uttar Pradesh (U.P.).

Legal References

Acts
Indian Penal Code (IPC) - Sections 304, 323, 504

Excerpt

prayer: civil revision petition filed under article 227 of constitution of india against the order dated 25.02.2004 made in r.e.a.no.954 of 1995 in rep.no.1/93 by the hon'ble additional sub-judge, salem, dismissing the petition filed by the petitioner herein seeking to implead themselves in the execution proceedings in rep no.1/93 and thereby permit them to contest the claim of the first respondent.1. heard learned counsel for the applicants, shri mahipal singh, learned counsel for the complainant and learned a.g.a. appearing for the state. 2. it is contended by the learned counsel for the applicants that there are cross cases. from the side of the applicants four persons have received injuries and initially the present f.i.r. was lodged as n.c.r. case thereafter it has been altered after the death of the deceased on 16.6.2010. 3. learned private counsel for the complainant contended that injury was inflicted on the head of the deceased due to which he died and prior to this occurrence applicant had entered into the house of the complainant and inflicted injuries 4. learned a.g.a. has supported the same facts. 5. there are cross cases. from the side of the applicants four persons have received injuries. cause of death is coma as a result of head injury and it is not clear who is the author of the head injury. 6. considering the facts and circumstances of the case and submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicants and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the applicants are entitled to be released on bail. 7. let the applicants maya ram, shiv bahadur, mangla and vishram involved in case crime no. 704 of 2010 , under sections 304, 323, 504 ipc police station shahganj district jaunpur be released on bail on their furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned.

Full Judgment

1. Heard learned counsel for the applicants, Shri Mahipal Singh, learned counsel for the complainant and learned A.G.A. appearing for the State.

2. It is contended by the learned counsel for the applicants that there are cross cases. From the side of the applicants four persons have received injuries and initially the present F.I.R. was lodged as N.C.R. case thereafter it has been altered after the death of the deceased on 16.6.2010.

3. Learned Private Counsel for the complainant contended that injury was inflicted on the head of the deceased due to which he died and prior to this occurrence applicant had entered into the house of the complainant and inflicted injuries 4. Learned A.G.A. has supported the same facts.

5. There are cross cases. From the side of the applicants four persons have received injuries. Cause of death is coma as a result of head injury and it is not clear who is the author of the head injury.

6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicants and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the applicants are entitled to be released on bail.

7. Let the applicants Maya Ram, Shiv Bahadur, Mangla and Vishram involved in Case Crime No. 704 of 2010 , under Sections 304, 323, 504 IPC Police Station Shahganj District Jaunpur be released on bail on their furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial