KANLESH KUMAR Vs. STATE OF U.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Government Advocate for the State as well as perused the documents available on record.

(2.) This petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter referred to as the 'Code') has been filed by the petitioner with the following prayers:

(3.) The submission of learned counsel for the petitioner is that neither the petitioner was named in the First Information Report nor the Investigating Officer has collected any evidence that the petitioner has played any role in withdrawal of the so called amount from the account of the complainant. The Investigating Officer has charge-sheeted the petitioner only on the ground that one of the co-accused had named the petitioner too. In this way there is no evidence against the petitioner.