FAREED Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State and perused the material placed on record.

(2.) The present bail application has been filed by the applicant in case crime No. 482 of 2012, under Sections 394, 307, 411 IPC, police station Chandpur, District Bijnor with the prayer to enlarge him on bail.

(3.) It is contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that a tractor is alleged to have been recovered from the possession of the applicant when in fact no such recovery has been affected from the applicant nor there is any independent witness of the alleged recovery. It is further contended that no test identification parade has been conducted in the present case. It is further argued by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant was apprehended in a police party firing no injury case and he has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. Learned counsel for the applicant further contended that there is only one case under Section 25 Arms Act against the applicant which was registered after lodging of the present case. It is next contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is in jail since 24.8.2012 and in case he is enlarged on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.