1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR 1. S.B. CR. MISC. BAIL APPL. NO.3726/2010 Ashok Kumar vs. State 2. S.B. CR.MISC.BAIL APPL. NO.3343/2010 Manoj Kumar vs. State Date of order : 13/5/2010. HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAMMAD RAFIQ Shri Rajesh Sharma ) Shri Gaurav Gupta ) for the petitioners. Shri Amit Punia, P.P. for the State. ****** Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned Public Prosecutor for the State and perused the relevant documents placed before me. These two bail applications have been filed by accused Ashok Kumar and Manoj Kumar who were both arrayed as accused in FIR No.265/2009 registered with Police Station Shahpura, District Jaipur for offences under Section 342 and 395 IPC. Allegation against both the accused petitioners is that they forcibly took away the tractor from one Bhola Ram and also snatched a sum of Rs.8010/- and Nokia handset. Learned counsel for the accused- petitioners has argued that the accused- petitioners was arrested on 15.12.09 and their test identification parade was conducted on 6.1.2010, whereas the date of incident was 11.5.2009. It is contended that the identification parade was carried out 20 2 days after the date of arrest and the accused-petitioners were shown to the complainant. No previous case was registered against the petitioners and in so far as record is concerned, learned counsel has argued that there are two informations for recovery shown to have been procured by the investigating agency from the accused petitioners. In the first such information, it is stated that he gave the information that he could get the tractor recovered from Jaipur and in second such information the tractor was shown to be lying in the house of the accused Ashok Kumar. Recovery was falsely shown from the house of the accused Ashok Kumar, whereas the real dispute was between the new driver Ramesh was engaged by Bheeva Ram, the owner of the tractor and the old driver Bhola Ram. The owner of the tractor Bheeva Ram never informed him about the theft of the tractor. Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the bail application and submitted that statement of Bheeva Ram was recorded on 11.5.09 itself in which he has stated that he had doubt against certain persons and he named them and also said that he wanted to change the driver, but then the recovery has been made from the residence of the accused Ashok Kumar. Challan has been filed only recently and the statements of witnesses have so far not been recorded. Without expressing any opinion on 3 the merits of this case but considering all the facts and circumstances of the case, I deem it appropriate to enlarge the petitioner Manoj Kumar on bail. In the result, the bail application of accused-petitioner Manoj Kumar u/S.439 Cr.P.C. is allowed and it is directed that petitioner Manoj Kumar S/o Satyabhan shall be released on bail in F.I.R. No.265/2009 P.S. Shahpura, Distt., Jaipur on his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.30,000/- together with two sureties in the sum of Rs.15,000/- each to the satisfaction of the trial Court for his appearance before that court on all dates of hearing and as and when called upon to do so till conclusion of the trial. No case is made out for enlarging accused Ashok Kumar on bail and the bail application of Ashok Kumar S/o Satyaveer is dismissed for the present. He would be however at liberty to renew his prayer for enlarging on bail, after statement of key prosecution witnesses are recorded. (MOHAMMAD RAFIQ), J. RS/