BANTI Vs. STATE OF U.P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned Additional Government Advocate for the State of U.P. and perused the record.

(2.) The present bail application has been filed by the applicant seeking bail in Case Crime No. 192 of 2021, under Ss. 420, 468, 469, 471 IPC and Ss. 52, 53 Disaster Management Act and Sec. 3 Pandemic Act, Police Station, Sector 58, District Gautam Buddh Nagar.

(3.) Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the present crime. It is submitted that name of the applicant surfaced in the confessional statement of co-accused Deepanshu @ Dharmveer. This statement is not admissible in evidence. The applicant is the owner of a printing press. No direct evidence is available with the prosecution to support the story of the prosecution. The recovery shown by the prosecution is liable to be ignored, at this stage of bail, as there is no public independent witness to the alleged recovery. It is stated that co-accused Deepanshu @ Dharmveer was having visiting card of the applicant, as such, just to extract money from the applicant, which was denied the applicant has falsely been implicated in the instant case. It is also stated that other co-accused namely Shahrukh, from whose possession a Remdesivir injection was recovered, has already been released on bail by this Court vide order dtd. 19/4/2022 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.53129 of 2021. Accordingly, the applicant is also entitled for bail. It is also submitted that there is no apprehension that after being released on bail, he may flee from the course of law or may otherwise misuse the liberty of bail and the applicant is in jail since 8/5/2021.