MOHD SHAMIM Vs. STATE OF U. P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. Brijesh Kumar, learned counsel for applicant, learned Additional Government Advocate appearing on behalf of State, through video conferencing in view of COVID-19 Pandemic and perused the record. Despite notice and revision of list, no-one has put in appearance on behalf of complainant.

(2.) This first bail application has been filed with regard to Case Crime No.91/2019, under Sections 302/34 I.P.C. registered in Police Station Itaunja, District Lucknow.

(3.) Learned counsel for applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the charge of having caused death of Kadeer Khan @ Guddu, husband of co-accused Smt. Shabnam. It has been submitted that the applicant has been taken into custody only on the basis of doubt and suspicion and there is not even any circumstantial evidence against the applicant. Learned counsel has further submitted that the applicant is not named in the F.I.R. and was taken into custody on the basis of investigation whereunder also the only case indicated against him is of frequent phone calls between applicant and co-accused Smt. Shabnam whereby an inference has been drawn by the investigating authority of an illicit relationship between the two leading to death of husband of co-accused Smt. Shabnam. It has been submitted that there is no cogent material or evidence to support the prosecution case. Learned counsel submits that the applicant has been in jail since 02.04.2019 and as yet only charges have been framed without any evidence being led.