KAMAL KUMAR KAUSHAL Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD learned counsel for the applicant and learned Additional Government Advocate. Gone through the FIR, bail rejection order, recovery memo and other documents annexed hereto. It comes out from the recovery memo annexed as Annexure-4 to the bail application that the applicant has accepted commission of crime relating to Crime No. 686 of 2008 along with one Wasi Ahmad. By means of this bail application moved under Section 439 Cr.P.C. the applicant has prayed that he be released on bail in Crime No. 686 of 2008, initially registered under Section 393 IPC, but subsequently converted under Sections 397/398/120-B IPC, police station Ram Sanehi Ghat, district Barabanki. It has been argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that initially the FIR was registered against unknown person, but subsequently when the applicant was arrested in Case Crime No. 07 of 2009, under Section 3/25 Arms Act and Case Crime No. 08 of 2009, under Section 8/21 NDPS Act there the applicant has confessed. It has further been argued that the alleged confession made before police authority has got no authentic evidentary value and the police authority just to implicate the applicant had got the confession mentioned in Case Crime Nos. 07 of 2009 and 08 of 2009 respectively. It has further been submitted that on the basis of the alleged confession made by the applicant in the aforesaid crime numbers, he cannot be implicated in Crime No. 686 of 2008. There seems some force in the argument of the learned counsel for the applicant. Accordingly, I direct that applicant Kamal Kumar Kaushal, accused of Crime No. 686 of 2008, initially registered under Section 393 IPC and subsequently converted under Sections 397/398/120-B IPC, police station Ram Sanehi Ghat, district Barabanki be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of Court concerned.