Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the application of the petitioners for discharge has been dismissed for the wrong reasons vide impugned order dated 26.4.2012. It has been pointed out that the only evidence that has been taken into account against the petitioner is the statement of Darshan S/o Sumer recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C.
The statement, appended as Annexure-8, has been read in extenso. All that has been stated in the statement is that the main accused Anumod used .315 bore rifle that belonged to the petitioner, who happens to be father of Anumod.
It is not the case of the prosecution that the petitioner accompanied Anumod to the place of incident or that the petitioner conspired to commit the offence.
Issue notice to the respondents, returnable on 23.7.2012.
List on 23.7.2012.
Proceedings only qua the petitioner shall remain stayed till the next date of listing.
Order Date :- 16.5.2012 A.Nigam