VEER SINGH Vs. STATE OF U.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD the learned counsel for the applicants and the learned A.G.A. The matter was placed before the regular court but Hon'ble Judge directed the matter to be put up before me. I entertain a doubt if such a direction can be given unless it was a second bail application in which the first bail application had been rejected by me or unless the application related to certain corrections to be made by me in any earlier order. However, when it has come in the list published under authority of the Hon'ble Chief Justice, I presume that I have been given a determination for this bail application also, atleast for today. The learned counsel relied on my order in another application No. 13049 of 1995 in which two co -accused persons standing on the same footing with the present applicants were granted bail. The learned A.G.A., submits that in this application these applicants may not claim parity as Veer Singh had 51 cases pending against him, whereas the other co -accused Komal Singh had only 13 cases pending against him. It is further contended by the learned counsel that Konch is a small town and whenever any offence occurs the police lays its hand firstly on the applicants even without any proof. It is submitted that the applicants have not yet been convicted in any one of the prosecutions launched against them.

(2.) I keep the submission of the learned A.G.A. in mind. On the merit of the case, I find that the alleged occurrence is of May, 1995, the first statement of the victim was made in August. 1995. This, in my view, is sufficient to release these applicants also on bail.