ANKUR SHARMA Vs. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri Rajendra Singh, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Amit Bhatt, learned Addl. G.A. for the State.

(2.) Learned counsel for the accused/applicant has submitted that the applicant is not named in the F.I.R. Even, the theft of the motorcycle was committed on 10.06.2010 and the F.I.R. of the same was lodged on 15.06.2010 without explaining the sufficient cause of delay. He further submitted that the said motorcycle was recovered on 18.07.2010 from Meerut. He has also argued that the recovery of motorcycle was not shown from the possession of the applicant and he has been falsely implicated in the case. He also submitted that the applicant has no criminal history.

(3.) After hearing learned counsel for the parties and perusing the papers available on record and without expressing any opinion about the final merits of the case, the Court is of the view that the applicant deserves bail at this stage.