SHAKEEL Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has been roped in this case on the disclosure statement of his own and that of the co-accused where he has stated that this petitioner remained sitting in the car whereas rest had gone to the house of the complainant to commit robbery. It is not the case of the prosecution that some task was assigned to him in furtherance of their common intention and i.e. why this petitioner was asked to remain sitting in the car nor it is the case of the prosecution that he was present in the car in order to watch the activities of the passersby. He has been brought in the net on the ground that he was sitting in the car otherwise no overact is attributed to this petitioner nor any recovery of the robbed articles was recovered from him. The petitioner is in custody since 8th December, 2005. Looking to his long detention in the jail and also taking into consideration that there is no material available against him except his own disclosure statement and that of the co-accused, he is admitted to bail. The petitioner be released on bail on his executing a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 20,000/- with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court.