IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION Dated: Nainital: the 30th day of November 2009 Ist Bail Application No.728 of 2009 Order on the Bail application of accused. CRIMINAL SIDE Smt. Rambiri ..….Applicant (In Jail) Versus State of Uttarakhand …….Opposite party Dated: November 30, 2009 ____________________________________________________________________ Arising out of Case Crime No.429/2008 Under Sections 394, 120-B and 411 IPC P.S. Jawalapur, District Haridwar ________________________________________________________________ Hon’ble Dharam Veer, J. Heard Sri Parikshit Saini, learned counsel for the applicant as well as Sri Amit Bhatt, learned Addl. G.A. for the State and perused the record. In brief, the prosecution story is that on 13.10.2008 at 4 PM four persons committed robbery of Rs.13,56,190/- at Syndicate Bank, Avdhut Mandal Ashram, P.S. Jawalapur. The F.I.R. of the said incident was lodged by the Manager of the Bank on the same day at 5 PM. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the present applicant is not named in the FIR and there is no evidence against the applicant which can connect her with the said crime. On the other hand, learned Addl. GA has submitted that although the applicant was not named in the FIR but she was involved in the said crime. Her name came into light when the co-accused Balwinder was arrested by the Delhi Police. In his confessional statement he disclosed the name and involvement of present applicant in this case. Learned Addl. G.A. further submitted that it has come in the evidence that the applicant had given some money out of the robbed money to one property dealer, namely, Anil Saraswat for purchasing the property through Jitendra and Sushil Nagar. Learned Addl. G.A. further submitted that the applicant has criminal history and four cases of the same nature are pending in different court against her, which are as hereunder:- (a) Case Crime No.133/08 u/s 395, 397, 120-B IPC, P.S. Sector 56, Gurgaon Haryana. (b) Case Crime No.477/08 u/s 395, 397, 120-B IPC, P.S. Samaypur, Badli Delhi. (c) Case Crime No.18/09 u/s 393, 397, 34 IPC, P.S. Kamla Market, Delhi. (d) Case Crime No.89/09 u/s 307, 452, 120-B IPC, P.S. Hastinapur, Meerut, U.P. After considering all the facts and circumstances; hearing learned counsel for the parties; on perusal of the contents of FIR; and especially considering the criminal history of the applicant, this Court is of the view that the present applicant does not deserve bail at this stage. The bail application is accordingly rejected. (Dharam Veer, J.) 30.11.2009 RG