VIKAS Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) VIKAS is praying for regular bail. He is booked in this case alongwith his six co-accused.

(2.) MR . Dinarpur contends that the present petitioner is not named in the FIR. Then contends that subsequently two co-accused of the petitioner namely Ram Narain alias Guddu and Anuj Tyagi were arrested in case FIR Nos. 437 and 436 dated 11.6.2004 registered at Police Station Sangam Vihar, New Delhi under Sections 25/54/59 of the Arms Act and during the interrogation of the aforesaid co-accused they had disclosed before the police that they alongwith present petitioner and other persons had committed dacoity for which the present case was already registered. Mr. Dinarpur states that no identification parade was conducted in this case. The statement of the co- accused of the petitioner in which he has been implicated does not carry any legal weight being inadmissible in evidence. Then contends that, no doubt, some recovery has been effected from the present petitioner but one of the co-accused namely Mukesh Kumar who is factually similarly situated with the present petitioner and from whom also some recovery of stolen articles was effected has already been granted regular bail by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Faridabad. He places on record photo copy of the said order which is taken on record.

(3.) THE factual position is not controverted by the learned State counsel who otherwise has opposed the bail application.