IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION Dated: Nainital: the 8th day of April 2008 Criminal First Bail application no. 200 of 2008 Order on the Bail application of accused. CRIMINAL SIDE Ragesh Kumar alias Guddu S/o Jausukhlal alias Kanta Prasad, R/o Chausara, P.S. Bilaspur, Pilibhit, Uttar Pradesh. … Applicant Versus State of Uttaranchal … Opposite party Arising out of case crime no. 3142/07 U/Ss, 420,414 I.P.C. Police Station- Khatima, District Udham Singh Nagar. Hon’ble Dharam Veer, J. On 10.03.2008 two weeks’ time was granted to the learned State Counsel for filing counter affidavit in this matter and this Court fixed 28th March 2008. On 28.03.2008; the case was listed on the board but no counter affidavit has been filed by the State and 8th April 2008 was fixed. On 28.03.2008 it was specifically mentioned in the order that in the meanwhile, if the reply is filed, it shall be considered and in case the reply is not filed till that date, the bail application shall be disposed of in the absence of the reply. Till today no counter affidavit or reply has been filed by the State. Therefore, this Court is proceeded for hearing on the bail application. Heard Sri Tumul Nailwal learned counsel for the applicant/ accused and Smt. Mamta Bisht, learned A.G.A. for the State. In brief, the prosecution case is this that on 18.07.2007 Hero Honda Splender Motorcycle was recovered from the possession of co- accused Mahendra who was driving the motorcycle at the time of arrest and the present applicant was sitting in the back seat of the motorcycle. Lateron, on the pointing out of the co-accused Mahendra, it was shown that five motorcycles were recovered from the bushes and the applicant was failed to show the papers of the motorcycles. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that as per averments made in the First Information Report, at that time the present applicant was not driving the motorcycle, he was sitting on the back seat of the motorcycle and the motorcycle was recovered from the possession of the co-accused Mahendra. He has further submitted that the motorcycle, which was shown to be recovered from the bushes, has been recovered on the pointing out of the co- accused Mahendra and not from the possession or on the pointing out of the present accused/ applicant. It is further submitted that the applicant has no criminal history before this case. Learned Addl. Govt. Advocated has also failed to show any criminal history of the accused/applicant before this case. Learned counsel for the accused/applicant has further submitted that the present accused/applicant is in jail since 18.07.2007 and the trial of the case has yet not been started. It is further submitted that the accused/applicant has been released on bail in the present case crime no. 3142/07 for the offence punishable u/s 467,468,471,411 I.P.C. read with Section 41/102 Cr.P.C., police station Khatima, district Udham Singh Nagar vide this Court’s order dated 11.12.2007. It is further argued that after the applicant was granted bail by this Court, the Investigating Officer has further added Sections 420 and 414 I.P.C. in the above crime. Lastly, it is submitted that the Investigating Officer has not collected any material which would attract the ingredients of Section 420 and 414 I.P.C. Learned Addl. Govt. Advocate also failed to show that any other relevant material is collected by the Investigating Officer against the applicant/accused in the said crime. 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 Ragesh Kumar be released on bail {in case crime no. 3142/2007 u/s 420,414 I.P.C. Police Station Khatima, District Udham Singh Nagar} on his executing a personal bond and furnishing two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of C.J.M., Udham Singh Nagar. The bail application is disposed of accordingly. (Dharam Veer, J.) NCM: