SHYAM RAM @ SHYAM LAL Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD learned Counsel for the Applicant and the learned Public Prosecutor and perused the papers of charge sheet submitted against the Applicant and the co -accused persons.

(2.) LEARNED Counsel for the Applicant submits that the accused Applicant has been charge sheeted under the provisions of Section 299 Code of Criminal Procedure, and he has been arrested in the month of March, 2011. As per counsel for the Petitioner, recovery in question was made on 16.10.2009 from a Bolero jeep bearing registration number RJ -22 -UA -1956, however, registration whereof has been found to be forged. Counsel for the Petitioner further submits that in the said Bolero jeep, two persons were found to be sitting, namely, Khangar Ram and Girdhari Singh. Girdhar Singh is said to have been driving the vehicle. He further submits that these two accused persons after they were taken into custody, made a disclosure to the police officers that the Applicant was also accompanying them. As per counsel for the Applicant, apart from the said disclosure made by the co -accused persons in custody to the police officers, there is no other evidence to connect the Applicant with the alleged crime. He further submits that co -accused, namely, Khangar Ram, who was sitting in the Bolero jeep and was apprehended on the spot, has already been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 29.03.2010 while allowing his bail application being S.B. Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 1517/2010. Learned Counsel for the Applicant further submits that said statement of the co -accused persons given to the police officers is of no consequence in view of Section 25 of the Evidence Act.

(3.) HAVING considered the above circumstances, without commenting on merits of the case, this Court is inclined to accept this bail application under Section 439 Code of Criminal Procedure.