SANT GYANESHWAR SWAMI SADANAND JI PARAMHANS Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) S. K. Phaujdar, J. Heard the learned counsel for the applicant and complainant as well as learned A. G. A.

(2.) THE petitioner stands involved in Case Crime No. 120 of 1999 under Section 302/120-B, I. P. C. , P. S. Kotwali Nagar, Dis trict Sullanpur and an M. L. A. was mur dered in the day light and two persons were chased and arrested. It is stated that they had made certain statements before the police indicating involvement of the present applicant. Materials have come to show that two witnesses had made state ments under Section 161, Cr. P. C. concerning conspiracy hatched by the present ap plicant. Learned counsel for the com plainant also placed before me a judgment of Supreme Court concerning this very applicant which related to this conviction under Section 302, I. P. C. but the Supreme Court gave him the benefit of doubt and acquitted him. THE learned A. G. A. sub mitted that at this stage only evidence of the incident could be collected and only a trial would establish the real truth.

(3.) IT is true that the situation raises a grave suspicion against the present ap plicant but the law is settled, suspicion alone may not take the place of proof where left with the two statements of Sach- chidanand Mishra and Dharm Prakash Singh and others but the same were recorded more than 3 months after the murder. In these circumstances, it is felt that a case for bail has been made out even enough the complainant points out to the criminal history of the applicant.