Posted On by &filed under Allahabad High Court, High Court.


Allahabad High Court
Yadukul Bhushan @ Bhushan Sehgal vs State Of U.P. on 29 January, 2010
Court No. - 25

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 27380 of 2009

Petitioner :- Yadukul Bhushan @ Bhushan Sehgal
Respondent :- State Of U.P.
Petitioner Counsel :- Kshitij Shailendra
Respondent Counsel :- Govt. Advocate

Hon'ble Rajesh Chandra,J.

This is the second bail application of the accused Yadkul Bhushan @
Bhushan Sahgal.

One of the new grounds mentioned in the bail application is that the statement
of PW1 Vinod Kumar was recorded on 26.3.08 but has yet not been
completed despite expiry of 18 months.

The applicant seeks bail under the provisions of Section 437(6) of the Cr.P.C.
On enquiry it revealed that the bail application on this ground has not been
moved before the trial court.

The applicant cannot bye pass the trial court and cannot come directly to the
High Court.

In these circumstances, the present bail application is disposed of with this
direction to the accused applicant that the plea for bail under the provisions of
Section 437(6) Cr.P.C. may be be taken before the trial court so that the trial
court may consider the same and decide the application on its own merits. The
applicant may also take all other pleas available to him under law, under the
changed circumstance, if any.The trial court shall decide the said bail on its
own merits.

Order Date :- 29.1.2010
SM


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

* Copy This Password *

* Type Or Paste Password Here *

10 queries in 0.394 seconds.