KALI BAHADUR MALL Vs. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. Sandeep Kothari, Advocate for the applicant and Mr. Amit Bhatt, Addl. GA for the State.

(2.) Learned Counsel for the accused applicant argued that as per the prosecution case, the explosives shown to be recovered from the possession of the applicant actually belonged to co-accused Ram Chandra Uniyal, against whom the case was subsequently lodged as Case Crime No. 743/2009 and he is the main accused, who has been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 24.9.2009 and, therefore, the present applicant is also entitled for bail on the basis of parity. He further submitted that applicant is a poor labourer having no previous criminal history, who is in jail since 6.8.2009 and the trial of the case is yet to conclude.

(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.