KRISHNAVEER YADAV @ DABBAL Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

(2.) It has been contended on behalf of the applicant that the applicant is not named in the F.I.R. His name came into existence in the alleged extra judicial confession. The confessional statement of the accused given to witness Ajay Veer recorded on 15.11.2015. This extra judicial confessional statement is a week type of evidence, which cannot be relied upon. The applicant has no motive to commit offence. He has no previous criminal history to his credit and he has been falsely implicated in this case.

(3.) Several other submissions in order to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against the applicant have also been placed forth before the Court. The circumstances which, according to the counsel, led to the false implication of the accused have also been touched upon at length. It has been assured on behalf of the applicant that he is ready to cooperate with the process of law and shall faithfully make himself available before the court whenever required. It has also been submitted that the applicant is languishing in jail since 18.11.2015 and in the wake of heavy pendency of cases in the Court, there is no likelihood of any early conclusion of trial. Hence, the applicant is entitled for bail.