ANKUR CHAUHAN Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Parcha filed by Sri Atul Kumar on behalf of the complainant is taken on record.

(2.) Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. and the learned counsel for the complainant.

(3.) It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that in the present case, F.I.R. has been lodged on 18.1.2011 at 2.00 a.m. in respect of the incident allegedly occurred on 17.1.2011 at about 9.00 p.m. The applicant is not named in the F.I.R., but during investigation in the month of July, the statement of Sunil and Rita have been recorded, they have stated that the applicant had made a confessional statement before them, which is not correct. The applicant has not made any confessional statement before them or before any other person. On 12.9.2011, the applicant and the co-accused Anshu were arrested by the local police and a telephonic message was given to S.I.S., which was doing the investigation of the present case that the applicant has made a confessional statement and at the pointing out of the applicant and other co-accused stolen articles have been recovered. Thereafter, it is alleged that at the pointing out of the applicant, one stolen chain has been recovered, this recovery has not been given in the F.I.R. or in the list of looted items. The recovered chain was not bearing specific mark to connect the same with the commission of the alleged offence. There is no evidence against the applicant. The applicant has not been put up for identification. He is having no criminal antecedent. He is in jail since 12.9.2011.