It is contended by learned counsel for the applicant that applicant is not named in the FIR nor any incriminating article has been recovered from his possession or on his pointing out, his name for the first time was surfaced at the instance of unknown Mukbhir and thereafter in the alleged confessional statement of the accused applicant which was made by him while he was in Police custody. The role made out against the applicant is under sections 364 ,120-B IPC. It is next contended that there is no evidence which connect the applicant to alleged crime. The applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. There is no independent witness of the alleged incident. It is further contended that no specific role has been assigned to the applicant. Several other submissions in order to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against the applicant have also been placed forth before the Court. The circumstances which, according to the counsel, led to the false implication of the accused has also been touched upon at length. It is further submitted that applicant has no previous criminal history and there is also no possibility of applicant either fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the witnesses. Applicant is in jail since 11.7.2019, and undertakes that he will not misuse the liberty, if granted. It is lastly contended that co-accused persons have been granted bail by a co-ordinate Benches of this Court vide orders dated 9.9.2019, 25.9.2019 and 16.10.2019 passed in Crl. Misc. Bail Application No. 34885, 39286 and 42279 of 2019 respectively.
