IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION Dated: Nainital: the 27th day of March, 2010 Ist Bail Application No. 38 of 2010 Order on the Bail application of accused. CRIMINAL SIDE Naeem .….Applicant (In jail) Versus State of Uttarakhand …… Opposite Party ___________________________________________________________________ Arising out of Case Crime No. 83/2009, U/s 328, 379, 411 IPC, PS Patel Nagar, District Dehradun. _______________________________________________________________ March 27, 2010 HON’BLE DHARAM VEER, J. Mr. Rajeev Sharma, Advocate for the applicant. Mr. Amit Bhatt, Addl. GA for the State. Heard. Learned Counsel for the accused applicant submitted that the applicant is not named in the FIR and even the truck in question has not been recovered from the possession of the applicant. He further submitted that as per the prosecution story itself, the said truck was recovered from the possession of co-accused Sonu Verma and the name of the present applicant has come into light on the basis of statement of co- accused Sonu Verma. Learned Addl. GA for the State while opposing the bail application submitted that the applicant had run away from the place of occurrence while co-accused Sonu Verma was arrested. Learned Counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant has got no previous criminal history, who is in jail since 26.4.2009 and the trial is yet to conclude. 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 Naeem be released on bail on his executing a personal bond and furnishing of two sureties, each in the like amount, to the satisfaction of Magistrate concerned. Bail application is allowed accordingly. (Dharam Veer, J.) 27.3.2010 PRABODH 2