AMIT TYAGI Vs. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Learned Counsel for the accused applicant submitted that missing report of deceased Munesh was lodged on 17.1.2010 by the complainant and parts of the dead body of the deceased were recovered on 7.3.2010 and the applicant was arrested on the same day and sent to jail. He further argued that even the case against the applicant rests upon the circumstantial evidence and there is no direct evidence against the applicant. He further submitted that the chain of circumstances is not complete against the accused applicant to connect him with the alleged crime. He also submitted that co-accused Karan Tyagi has been granted bail by the Sessions Court and the present applicant is also entitled for bail on the basis of parity.

(2.) Opposing the bail application, learned Addl. GA for the State argued that parts of dead body of Munesh were recovered on the pointing out of the applicant during police remand. Learned Counsel for the applicant submitted that recovery of some parts of the dead body is not sufficient to connect the applicant with the alleged crime.

(3.) Having heard the submissions of learned Counsel for the parties; perusal of the contents of the FIR and other papers available on record; in view of the facts and circumstances of the case and without commenting upon the final merits of the case, the Court is of the view that the applicant deserves bail at this stage.