IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION Dated: Nainital: the 29th day of January 2009 Ist Bail Application No.71 of 2009 Order on the Bail application of accused. CRIMINAL SIDE Suneel Rathi S/o Late Sri Naresh Rathi R/o Village Tekri, P.S. Dohaghat, District Bagpath (U.P.) ….Applicant (In Jail) Versus State of Uttarakhand …….Opposite party Dated: January 29, 2009 ____________________________________________________________________ Arising out of Case Crime No.208/2006 Under Sections 386, 506 & 120-B IPC P.S. Kotwali Rookee, District Haridwar ______________________________________________________________ Hon’ble Dharam Veer, J. Heard Sri Manish Arora, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri S.S. Adhikari, learned A.G.A. for the State. In brief, the prosecution case is that on 13.07.2006 at at 09:40 A:M the complainant Pankaj Jindal received a call on his mobile from another mobile. In the mobile phone a person who had given a call to Pankaj Jindal told his name Sunil Rathi and demanded Rs.5.00 Lacs from him. With the same averments, the F.I.R. was lodged by Pankaj Jindal on 13.07.2006 at 10:30 A:M at P.S. Kotwali, Rookee, District Haridwar. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the complainant Pankaj Jindal has been examined in the trial court, for that he has filed the copy of the statement of Pankaj Jindal, recorded in the trial court, as Annexure No.2 in support of bail application. He further argued that the co-accused Vineet Sharma @ Chinu has been released on bail vide order dated 20.09.2007 of this Court and the present applicant is also entitled for bail on the basis of parity. After considering all the facts and circumstances of the case and perusal of the statement of Pankaj Jindal, recorded in the trial court, without expressing any opinion about the final merits of the case, the Court is of the view that the present applicant deserves bail at this stage. Let the applicant-Suneel Rathi be released on bail on his executing personal bond and furnishing two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of Judicial Magistrate, Roorkee. (Dharam Veer, J.) Vacation Judge 29.01.2009 RG