Ritik v. State of U.P.

Court No. - 92

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 4351 of 2022

Applicant :- Ritik Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Rahul Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

Hon'ble Vikas Budhwar,J.

Heard Sri Rahul Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant, and Sri Shrawan Kumar Ojha, the learned AGA for the State.

This bail application purported to be under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C. has been move on behalf of applicant- Ritik for enlarging him on bail in Case Crime No.183 of 2021 under Section 392, 411 I.P.C, registered at Police Station-Jaithra, District- Etah.

The bail application so preferred by the applicant has been rejected by the court below on 3.12.2021.

Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that a first information report has been lodged before P.S. Jaithra, District Etah under Section 392 IPC being FIR No. 0183 with an allegation that the applicant had robbed all the valuables. Learned counsel for the applicant has further argued that the applicant has not been named in the FIR and he has been falsely implicated in the case in question. His name could surface only on the basis of the confessional statement of one of the coaccused and was also not named. Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that he has been falsely implicated in the case in question. He has not committed the said offence and has referred to paragraph no. 10 and 11 that all the criminal cases, which have been sought to be lodged referable to criminal history are post lodging of the FIR. Learned counsel for the applicant has further argued that he is languishing in jail since 18.5.2021. If the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail, he be enlarged on bail.