PRAKASH Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD the learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. and perused record. The applicant is involved in Case Crime No.936 of 2008, under Sections 302, 201 I.P.C., Police Station Megalganj, District Lakhimpur Kheri. As against the complicity of the applicant it is submitted that he is not named in the F.I.R. and the entire case is based on suspicion. The circumstantial evidence of the case does not constitute a complete chain. Co-accused Raksh Pal Singh, against whom recovery of Shirt and Gamchha of the deceased was alleged, has already been granted bail mainly on the ground of the case being of circumstantial evidence and secondly that at the bottom of the recovery memo it is mentioned that the copy of the recovery memo was given to the accused, Raksh Pal Singh but he threw it in the water which showed that recovery memo was not prepared at the alleged date, time and place. It is also said that the allegation against the applicant is only that of catching hold. He is said to be in jail from 16.09.2008. In para 12 it is claimed that there is no criminal history against him. The bail is however, opposed by learned A.G.A. The points pertaining to nature of accusation, danger of accused absconding or fleeing if released on bail, character, behaviour and position of the accused, severity of punishment, reasonable apprehension of tampering the witnesses, prima facie satisfaction regarding proposed evidence and genuineness of the prosecution case were duly considered. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances and without entering into the merits of the case and particularly having regard to the role attributed to the applicant and the fact that the entire case is based on circumstantial evidence which does not constitute a complete chain, I find it to be a fit case for granting bail. Let the applicant (Prakash) be enlarged on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Magistrate/court concerned.