SAURABH SONKAR @ SUBHAM Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

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

(2.) Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant is innocent. He has been falsely implicated. The applicant is neither named in the F.I.R. nor anything has been recovered from his possession. The alleged recovery of Rs.2,45000/- was false and fabricated. Infact the money which isalleged to have been recovered from the possession of the applicant is his own money (of applicant's family). The mother of the applicant is running a fair price shop and the money which was shown as recovered from the applicant in fact belonged to the applicant's mother and the applicant was lifted by the police from his house along with that money and later recovery was shown.

(3.) The applicant is in jail since 4.09.2013. There is no previous criminal history of the applicant. The whole story of the prosecution is highly improbable. The applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail.