IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION Dated: Nainital: the 10th day of March, 2010 Urgency Application No. 852/2010 Ist Bail Application No. 138 of 2010 Order on the Bail application of accused. CRIMINAL SIDE Ashok Pundir .….Applicant (In jail) Versus State of Uttarakhand …… Opposite Party ___________________________________________________________________ Arising out of Case Crime No. 50/2009, U/s 406, 420, 504 & 506 IPC, PS Bhagwanpur, District Haridwar. _______________________________________________________________ March 10, 2010 HON’BLE DHARAM VEER, J. Mr. Manish Arora, Advocate for the applicant. Mr. M.A. Khan, Brief Holder for the State. In view of the reasons mentioned in the accompanying affidavit, urgency application is allowed. Heard on the bail application of the accused applicant. Learned Counsel for the accused applicant argued that no recovery of cement has been made from the possession of the accused applicant and till date the allegedly stolen cement count be recovered. He further submitted that as per the statement of the drivers of the truck, no allegation was made against the accused applicant that they transported the trucks loaded with the cement somewhere else on the instructions of the accused applicant. He lastly submitted that the accused applicant is in jail since 24.12.2009 and there is no previous criminal history against him and the trial of the case is yet to begin. Having heard the submissions of learned Counsel for the parties; perusal of the contents of the FIR and other papers available on record; in view of the facts and circumstances of the case and without commenting upon the final merits of the case, the Court is of the view that the applicant deserves bail at this stage. Let the applicant Ashok Pundir be released on bail on his executing a personal bond and furnishing of two sureties, each in like amount, to the satisfaction of JM, Roorkee. Bail application is allowed accordingly. (Dharam Veer, J.) 10.3.2010 PRABODH 2