IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION Dated: Nainital: the 24th day of April 2008 Criminal Second Bail application no. 144 of 2008 Order on the Bail application of accused. CRIMINAL SIDE Mustakeem S/o Mahfooz, R/o village Jogiya Vihar, P.S. Phugana, District Meerut (U.P.) … Applicant Versus State of Uttarakhand … Opposite party Arising out of case crime no. 81/2002 U/Ss, 489-B, 489-C I.P.C. Police Station-Ranipur, District Haridwar. Hon’ble Dharam Veer, J. Heard Sri Vivek Shukla, learned counsel for the applicant/ accused and Sri Prabhakar Joshi, learned Brief Holder for the State. This is the second bail application moved by the applicant. The first bail application was dismissed as not press on 08.01.2008. The prosecution case, in brief, is this that from the possession of the co-accused Tasleem a sum of Rs. 5,500/- (40 notes bearing cost of Rs. 100/- each and 3 notes bearing cost of Rs. 500/- each) was said to be recovered on 19.05.2002 at about 11:00 p.m. at Salempur TIRAHA, on the Ramnagar bridge, within P.S. Ranipur district Haridwar. The co-accused Tasleem, when arrested by the Police, in the police custody has disclosed that he had received the sum from the present accused/ applicant Mustakeem. With the same averments, the First Information Report was lodged by S.O. Yogendra Singh in the Police Station Ranipur, District Haridwar on 20.05.2002 at 1:45 a.m. Learned counsel for the applicant Sri Vivek Shukla has submitted that the main accused of the crime is Tasleem from whose possession, the said Notes were said to be recovered at the time of his arrest made by the Police. He has further submitted that the co- accused Tasleem has been acquitted by the orders passed by the Addl. Sessions Judge/I Fast Track Court, Haridwar on 18.01.2008. It is further submitted that the main accused has been acquitted by the Trial Court, therefore it creates doubt in the prosecution case and on the basis of acquittal of the co-accused, the applicant is entitled to bail. Learned counsel for the accused/applicant has also submitted that the confession of the co-accused made in the police custody, against the present applicant is not admissible as per the law. Lastly, it is submitted that the applicant is in jail since 18.10.2007 and the trial of the case has yet not started. Learned Brief Holder also conceded the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the applicant. After considering all the facts and circumstances and without expressing any opinion about the final merits of the case, the court is of the view that the applicant deserves bail at this stage. Let the applicant /accused Mustakeem be released on bail on his executing a personal bond and furnishing two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of C.J.M., Haridwar. The bail application is disposed of accordingly. (Dharam Veer, J.) NCM: