BA1/100/2019 of SHAHBAZ Vs STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

BA1 No. 100 of 2019 Hon’ble Sharad Kumar Sharma, J.

Mr. Pankaj Kumar Sharma, Advocate for the applicant.

Ms. Shivangi Gangwar, Brief Holder for the

State of Uttarakhand.

The coordinate Bench of this Court by an

order dated 10.01.2019 had granted time to the learned Brief Holder to file the counter affidavit. There is report dated 04.02.2019 by the Registry that no counter affidavit has been filed.

The applicant-Shahbaz is an accused in Case

Crime No. 7 of 2018 under Sections 379, 411, 420, 467, 468, 471 and 120-B of I.P.C registered at P.S. Gangnahar, District Haridwar on 07.01.2018. He is shown to be co-accused along with one Mr. Saleem, who had filed Bail Application No. 507 of 2018 and has been granted bail by the coordinate Bench of this Court on 19.03.2018 imposing certain conditions therein.

Considering the facts that the role of Shahbaz happens to be that of same of Saleem, who had already been granted bail, he too would be entitled to be released on bail under the same terms and condition as that of Saleem as levelled against him by the order dated 19.03.2018, as passed by the coordinate Bench of this Court. Heard learned counsel for the parties and considered the grounds taken up in the bail application.

Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant is not named in the FIR and only evidence against the applicant is the statement of Sahjeb and Faheem that such car was dropped by

the present applicant at their place and apart from

this, there is no evidence against the present applicant, moreover, such statement has no value in the eyes of law. He further submitted that the applicant has falsely been implicated in the instant crime and he is in jail since 17.01.2018.

Learned State Counsel vehemently opposed

the bail application and submitted that the applicant will flee away from justice, if he is granted bail. To this, learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant is ready to furnish sureties to the satisfaction of the Magistrate concerned, if he is directed to be enlarged on bail.

Considering the submission of the learned

counsel for the parties and without expressing any opinion as to the final merits of the case, this Court is of the view that applicant deserves bail at this stage.

The bail application is allowed.

Let the applicant be released on bail, on

executing personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- and furnishing two reliable & local sureties, each of like amount, to the satisfaction of Court concerned.

Mahinder/

(Sharad Kumar Sharma, J.)

Vacation Judge 05.02.2019