AMARIT SINGH Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard the learned counsel for the parties. According to The prosecution case on 26.1.1998 a dead body of a man with a towel like cloth tied around his neck was recovered. The dead body was of a driver of a truck carrying tyres from Baroda Gujrat and was passing through Delhi. On some secret information crime branch recovered 89 tyres from the godown of the accused (though it is clained that the godown was let out to one Gulshan) as it is apparent from the statement of Onkarnath Kaji and Mrs. Kanta. The truck was being driven by deceased Punjabi Lal. The accused was arrested and some more tyres-part of the stolen property were also recovered at his instance. He also made a disclosure statement indicating his in volvement in conspiracy.

(2.) The learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the accysed is in custods from 24.1.1998. The godown was let out to Gulshai.. It is contended that at the most the accused could be connected with the recovery of two tyres which.accord ing to the prosecution was recovered from his house on 28. 1.1998 . Consequently only offence under Section 412 Indian Penal Code . can be attributed to the accused. One witness Devender Pal has been examined who has not supportted the prosecution case. It is claimed that there is no other evidence. In the aforementioned circumstances, he submits that the petitioner should be released on bail.

(3.) The application is opposed by the learned counsel for the State on the Ms. Kohli on the ground that the accused is involved in the conspiracy of the commission of The of fence of murder. The accused has tried to mislead the prosecution by alleging that the godown was let out to Gulshan. According to the disclosure statement made some more tyres are yet to be recovered and the co accused involved in the con) spiracy has not been arrested so far. There are other witnesses of the same fact who are yet to be examined.