NAUSHAD Vs. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Learned counsel for the applicant argued that he is not named in the FIR and even the recovery of some garlands were shown from the possession of the applicant for which the applicant has stated that the recovery was made falsely to implicate him. Further he has no previous criminal history and he is in jail since 22.6.2010 and trial has yet not been started.

(2.) After considering all the facts and circumstances, perusing the contents of the FIR and other papers available on record, without expressing any opinion about the final merits of the case, the Court is of the view that the present applicant deserves bail at this stage.

(3.) Let the applicant be released on bail on his executing personal bond and furnishing two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of JM Roorkee, Distt.Haridwar.