PAWAN KUMAR Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Sri Vijit Saxena, learned counsel for the applicant and the learned A.G.A.

(2.) THE applicant is in jail since 5.2.2010. It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant that the victim is said to have been forcibly taken away by the accused persons on 1.1.2010 and was duly seen by two persons of the family of the complainant but despite the same the F.I.R. was lodged on 5.2.2010. THEre is no explanation as to why despite the witnesses informing the complainant about the girl being taken away by the accused persons the F.I.R. was not promptly lodged. It is further submitted that the applicant is in jail for the last 15 months and by now the Investigating Officer must have made the necessary investigation and interrogated the applicant and therefore, no fruitful purpose will be served by keeping the applicant in jail any further. It has been further submitted that the applicant has been falsely implicated on account of the village politics. It is further submitted that the Investigating Officer on making due investigation has submitted charge sheet only against the applicant although Jagveer was also named in the F.I.R. alongwith the applicant.