RAFAQAT ALIAS RIFAQAT Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD learned counsel for the applicant and learned Additional Government Advocate. Gone through the F.I.R., the bail rejection order and the counter and rejoinder affidavits exchanged between the parties. As per the prosecution case, Truck No. HR 58 - 3081 which was loaded with rice, is said to have been taken away by the applicant and after changing the number of the truck as HR 56 - 7496, the rice loaded on said truck was intended to be sold in the market instead of making delivery of the rice at its actual destination. In paragraphs 5 and 6 of the bail application, it has been categorically stated that the applicant has got no concern with the truck original number of which is HR 58 - 3081 and the applicant has falsely been roped in the said case. It is also stated that the applicant is not the owner of the truck No. HR 58 - 3081. Learned counsel submitted that the applicant has got nothing to do with respect with selling of the rice as alleged in the F.I.R. In the counter affidavit filed by the State, it has been stated that this truck actually belonged to one Munsab Ali which was hypothecated to the Bank from where it was taken by the applicant on the understanding that he will pay the installment due towards the Bank. There is nothing on record to prove this aspect of the matter as alleged in the counter affidavit. Without commenting further more on the merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the appellants deserves to be enlarged on bail. Let applicant Rafaqat alias Rifaqat involved in crime No. 629 of 2008 under Section 406, 419 & 420 IPC of P.S. Dargah Sharif, district Bahraich be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bahraich.