INAMUDDIN Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Public prosecutor for the State and perused the relevant documents placed before me.

(2.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner argued that the allegation against the petitioner is of receiving stolen items for which charge against him has been framed for offences under Section 411, 414 and 120b of the Indian Penal Code, which is punishable by 3 years imprisonment whereas the main accused is Deepu @ Devendra Pratap Singh. The coordinate bench of this Court on consideration of this very aspect while rejecting the bail application of co-accused Illiyas mohammad has extended the benefit of bail to co-accused Bhooru @ Kareem Beg vide order dated 07. 09. 2007 in S. B. Cr. Misc. Bail appl. No. 5035/07 against whom also charges under Sections 411, 414 and 120b ipc were framed. No previous case has ever been registered against the petitioner inasmuch as the challan having already filed and the trial of the case is likely to take long.

(3.) LEARNED Public Prosecutor has opposed the bail application and argued that considering the nature of the offence, the petitioner is not entitled to bail.