SURAJ VERMA Vs. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. DK Sharma, Advocate for the applicant and Mr. BS Parihar, Brief Holder for the State. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that he is not named in the FIR; the case rests upon the circumstantial evidence and the chain of the circumstances to connect the applicant with the said crime is not complete. Further, co-accused Ghananand Joshi, with the same role, has been granted bail by the Sessions Judge Nainital on 25.9.10 and the present applicant also deserves bail on the basis of parity. He further submitted that the only evidence against the present applicant is the confessional statement of co-accused Chaman Joshi recorded in the police custody, however the same is not admissible to be read into evidence as per law.

(2.) After considering all the facts and circumstances and 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 a personal bond and furnishing two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of CJM, Nainital.