AURELIA KHARNAIOR Vs. STATE OF MEGHALAYA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has filed the present Bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. seeking concession of bail in Mawlai P.S Case No. 12 (2) 2019, under Section 379 I.P.C. As per averments made in the petition, F.I.R. was lodged in the Mawlai Police Station on 18.02.2019 with the allegations that an Audio-Sony Tape recorder and Sony Amplifier was stolen from the car which was parked at Mawlai Nongkwar. The petitioner was arrested on 08.06.2019 and was produced in the Court of Additional Deputy Commissioner (J) on 09.06.2019 along with the Forwarding Report and was remanded for 12(twelve) days Judicial custody which expired on 21.06.2019. The petitioner moved an application seeking bail before the Additional Deputy Commissioner (J) at Shillong, which was endorsed to the Judicial Magistrate First Class where after calling for the Report of I.O was rejected on 27.06.2019.

(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioner, inter alia, submitted that nothing incriminating was recovered from the possession of the accused petitioner and he is not even named in the F.I.R. It was claimed that the petitioner is of tender age of 19 years and at the time of alleged incident he was passing through Mawlai Phudmawri towards his house at Mawlai. Accordingly, prayer was made that concession of bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C. be granted to the petitioner.

(3.) On the other hand, learned State counsel opposed the prayer and referred to the report of the Investigating Officer Annexure-III to urge that the petitioner had admitted that on 18.02.2019 he attempted commission of theft in the morning where he had stolen the tape and amplifier from vehicle in his locality Mawlai Nongkwar. However, learned counsel for the petitioner controverted the aforesaid admission by submitting that admission was made under pressure of the police and the locality personnels who were present there.