IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION Dated: Nainital: the 29th day of January 2009 Ist Bail Application No.74 of 2009 Order on the Bail application of accused. CRIMINAL SIDE Kamil S/o Nasrudin R/o Village Bahadurpur Garh P.S. Bahadurpur Garh, Distt. Ghaziabad (U.P.) At present R/o H.No.267, Mohalla Sukhlan, Pilkhuva, P.S. Pilkhuva, Distt. Ghaziabad (U.P. ….Applicant (In Jail) Versus State of Uttarakhand …….Opposite party Dated: January 29, 2009 ____________________________________________________________________ Arising out of Case Crime No.344/2008 Under Sections 379, 411 I.P.C. P.S. Kotwali Rookee, Distt. Hardwar ______________________________________________________________ Hon’ble Dharam Veer, J. Heard Sri S.C. Tygai, 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 07.08.2008 at 11:00 A:M theft of the car was committed, for that the F.I.R. was lodged by Deepak Kumar at Police Station Roorkee, District Hardwar on 09.08.2008 at 1:00 P:M. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the applicant/accused along with co-accused Irfan were arrested by the police on 09.08.2008 and from the possession of aforesaid two persons one car was shown to be recovered. He further submitted that the engine number and the chasis number mentioned in the FIR are different from the engine number and chassis number recorded in the recovery memo, which creates a doubt in the prosecution story. He further submitted that the F.I.R. of the said incident was lodged after two days of the said incident but there is no explanation regarding delay in lodging the F.I.R. He further submitted that the co-accused Shoaib has been released on bail by the order dated 15.09.2008 of Judical Magistrate, Roorkee and the co- accused Irfan has also been released on bail by this Court vide order dated 21.01.2009 and the present applicant is also entitled for bail on the basis of parity. After considering all the facts and circumstances of the case, 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-Kamil be released on bail on his executing personal bond and furnishing two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of Judical Magistrate, Rookee. (Dharam Veer, J.) Vacation Judge 29.01.2009 RG