SANJAY Vs. STATE OF U. P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned A.G.A. and perused the record.

(2.) Supplementary affidavit filed on behalf of the applicant is taken on record.

(3.) Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the role of conspiracy was assigned to one Vaseer Khan, co accused as well as the applicant whereas the role of commission of actual offence was assigned to the other co accused. It is argued that the bail application Vaseer Khan was allowed by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dtd. 5/1/2024 wherein the court had considered that there was no enough material to suggest link or establish the conspiracy alleged at the instance of the co accused Vaseer Khan. It is also on record that the other alleged co accused Muinuddin Khan and Mukesh Yadav, who were assigned the role of causing the actual offence were denied bail by this Court vide orders dtd. 9/1/2024, 26/2/2024 and 22/2/2024, respectively. It is also argued that one of the other co accused namely Sanjay Yadav Pradhan was enlarged on bail by his Court vide order dtd. 1/2/2024 passed by Co-ordinate Bench of this Court. Hence the applicant who is languishing in jail since 5/3/2023 having no criminal history, may also be enlarged on bail on the ground of parity.