different place. Pertinently, there are no statements of the witnesses to this panchanama in the charge-sheet. There is glaring inconsistency regarding place of recovery in the documents i.e. panchanama itself and the receipt (muddemal yadi). Although, jeans pant was having blood stains and DNA report shows that it matches with the blood of the deceased, it is difficult to hold that recovery of said articles is from the accused in view of the aforesaid inconsistency. Although, accused was arrested on 5.7.2021, discovery is not made under section 27 of the Evidence Act. Except the aforesaid evidence, there is nothing in the entire charge-sheet by which the applicant can be linked with the offence in question. Even, identification parade is not conducted during the course of the investigation. The description of the accused persons is also not appearing in statement of witnesses. Except so called seizure panchnama, no evidence is available to link the applicant. The applicant is behind bar from last more than two years. Trial would take its own time. Other accused persons are already released on bail. In that view of the matter, case is made out for grant of bail. Since there are previous offences registered against the applicant, stringent conditions are required to be imposed. Hence, the order.
