1 S.B.CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION NO.3346/2006 Date : 10.08.2006 HON'BLE MR. SATYA PRAKASH PATHAK, J. Mr. B.N. Kalla for the applicant. Mr. V.R. Mehta, Public Prosecutor for State. I have heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as the learned Public Prosecutor for the State and carefully gone through the impugned order. The contention of learned counsel for the applicant is that no investigation is to be made from the applicant and since last 11 months he is in custody, therefore, he may be enlarged on bail. On the other hand, learned Public Prosecutor submits that allegation against the accused applicant is that he hired Indica Taxi and on the way by putting pistol on head of the driver he was forcibly pushed from the taxi and fled away with the taxi. He further submits that cases against the accused applicant are pending at court of Delhi and Haryana. 2 Taking into consideration the overall facts and circumstances of the present case, I do not find it to be a fit case to extend benefit of bail to the applicant. Accordingly, the bail application moved under by the applicant under Section 439 Cr.P.C. is rejected. (SATYA PRAKASH PATHAK), J. vijayant