RAM BRIKCH YADAV Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Sri Ashok Kumar Singh learned Counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. and Sri Pradeep Kumar Shukla learned Counsel for the complainant.

(2.) THIS application is filed with a prayer that the applicant may be released on bail in case Crime No. 183 of 2005, under Sections 392, 411, 307 I.P.C. and Section 7 of the Criminal Law Amendment Act, P.S. Kotwali, District Azamgarh.

(3.) IT is contended by the learned Counsel for the applicant that the applicant was falsely implicated and prosecution story was highly improbable because the first informant did not receive any injury. According to the prosecution version the first informant was armed with licensed revolver, even then he did not cause any injury on the person of the accused. It is further contended that the applicant was falsely implicated because he was having ill will with the applicant. It is further contended that the prosecution has not come with clean hands because the applicant was not arrested as alleged by the prosecution. The correct fact is that the applicant was arrested from his house at about 4.00 p.m. on 13 -3 -2005 and the police has taken away Rs. 21,000 and some ornament of his wife. The worth of the ornament was Rs. 45,000 and the applicant is not having any criminal antecedent.