VEERPAL Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) VEERPAL , Nandlal and Nanhe Lal are before this Court with request to grant them bail in pending appeal.

(2.) LEARNED AGA has opposed the bail and submitted that there is ring of truth in the prosecution story that has been set up and in such a situation and in this background, bail should not be granted as in the present case, the report of the ballistic expert corroborates the theory that has been set up by the prosecution.

(3.) THIS Court has proceeded to examine the evidence of the prosecution witness that has come up on record and finds on prima facie basis that as far as PW1 is concerned he is not an eye witness to the incident in question and there are two other eye witnesses namely Smt. Nirmala (PW2) and Ram Swaroop (PW3) and both of them have not at all supported the case of the prosecution. Coupled with this appellant has come up with the specific case that the recovery in question has been manipulated after showing there arrest and as far as country made pistol is concerned, it has no specifications and? as such much reliance cannot be placed on the ballistic report. Looking to the background of case that there is no direct evidence and case thereafter is based on purely circumstantial evidence, and recovery of country made pistols has been seriously assailed, in such a situation and in this background on prima face material the appellants deserves to be released on bail.