GUL MOHAMMAD Vs. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

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

(2.) It is submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated. He further submitted that in fact, no recovery of any thing, as alleged by the prosecution has been made either from the possession of the applicant or at his pointing out and the allegation of the alleged recovery has been made just to make out a case against the applicant for the purpose of harassment. He further submitted that there is no independent witness of the alleged recovery. He further submits that neither the applicant has committed any such offence as alleged by the prosecution nor there is any credible evidence regarding his complicity in the alleged offence and has been falsely implicated just to harass, victimise and exert undue pressure on him. He further submitted that there is no chance of the applicant's fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the prosecution evidence and is in jail since 29.7.2011.

(3.) Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, severity of punishment and submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, I am of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail.