RAHUL SINGH Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD counsel for the applicant and the learned AGA.

(2.) THE applicant thorough this bail application, has prayed for bail in S.S.T. No.33 of 2014 arising out of Case Crime No.57 of 2014, under Sections 302, 201 IPC and Section 3(2)5 SC/ST Act of Police Station Etmadpur, District Agra.

(3.) SUBMISSION of counsel for the applicant is that FIR has been lodged against unknown person and there is no direct or indirect evidence against the applicant in committing murder of the deceased nor anything has been recovered from the possession of the applicant, but in spite of that he has been implicated in the case falsely. He further submits that call details collected by the Investigating Officer during the course of investigation, do not match with the mobile number of the applicant and more over, no role has been assigned to the applicant to commit the murder of the deceased. It is submitted that applicant is studying at Tundla, whereas the deceased was studying at Agra and only on the basis of statement of the informant, he has been implicated in the case though the applicant has not been named in the FIR. In sum and substance, the argument is that in absence of any cogent evidence to connect the applicant with the offence, he cannot be prosecuted and the proceedings against the applicant are wholly illegal as from the evidence of the witnesses also, it is apparent that no overt act has been assigned to the applicant in the commission of offence.