SUMIT KUMAR Vs. STATE OF U. P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A.-I appearing for the State and perused the record.

(2.) It is contended on behalf of the applicant that he is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He did not commit any offence as alleged. In fact the informant are Police Constable in U.P. Police and were posted at the same police station and they fell in love with each other and were in relationship since 2012. Transaction between the applicant and informant had been going on since 2015. The applicant never assured the informant that applicant will get her transferred to her desire location. It is expected that informant being an educated lady and very well know that transfer could be made only on the direction of I.G. Zone. It is further submitted that he has been implicated in the present due to ulterior motive. The applicant has no criminal antecedent.

(3.) Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail.