IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION First Bail Application No.931 of 2010 Order on the Bail application of accused. CRIMINAL SIDE Sushil Kumar ..….Applicant (In Jail) Versus State of Uttarakhand …….Opposite party Dated: October 29, 2010 __________________________________________________________________ Arising out of Case Crime No.134/10 and Crl. App. No.89/10 Under Sections 419 and 420 IPC P.S. Kotwali Gangnahar, Roorkee, Distrcit Haridwar ______________________________________________________________ Hon’ble Dharam Veer, J. Heard Mr. Manish Arora, Advocate for the applicant and Mr. Nandan Arya, AGA for the State. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the applicant was in jail during trial in connection with the alleged crime. He further submitted that after concluding the trial, the trial court vide judgment and order dated 10.8.2010 convicted the applicant-accused under the aforesaid sections. He further submitted that against the said judgment and order, the applicant filed an appeal before Sessions Judge and applied for bail during the pendency of appeal but the learned Sessions Judge admitted the appeal of the applicant while rejected his bail. Learned counsel for the applicant prayed that during the pendency of appeal the applicant may be released on bail. From a perusal of the bail rejection order dated 24.9.2010 passed by Sessions Judge, Haridwar and other papers available on record, prima facie the involvement of the applicant in the alleged crime is proved and therefore no case for bail is made out. The bail application is rejected accordingly. However, the learned Sessions Judge, Haridwar is directed to decide the appeal within one month after receipt of certified copy of this order. (Dharam Veer, J.) 29.10.2010 RG