1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARANCHAL AT NAINITAL Original Jurisdiction Dated: Nainital: the 12th day of October, 2006 First Bail Application No. 792 of 2006 Criminal Side Promod Sarkar S/o Sri Prafull Sarkar R/o Village Kutipara P.S. Ranaghat District Nadiya, West Bengal ……….. Applicant Versus State of Uttaranchal ………. Opposite Party Arising out of Crime No. 3337 of 2006 Under Section: 379/120 B I.P.C P.S.: Haldwani District: Nainital. Hon’ble Prafulla C. Pant, J. Heard Shri Pradeep Hairiya, learned counsel for the applicant and Shri Lalit Sharma, learned counsel for the complainant and Shri Nandan Arya, learned A.G.A. for the State. Applicant- Promod Sarkar, who is in jail in connection with crime No. 3337 of 2006, relating to offences punishable under Section 379, 120B I.P.C. P.S. Haldwani, District- Nainital, has sought his release on bail. Learned counsel for the applicant, argued that First Information Report is delayed by more than thirteen days and there is no recovery of the stolen property from the applicant. However, on perusal of the First Information Report, it is revealed that there had been a theft of an amount of Rs. 8,00,000/- from the vehicle of the complainant when he gave lift to the applicant Promod Kumar and one Kamal Gupta. The money, which was being taken by the complainant from bank to the site for distribution, the bundle of the currency notes in the bag were replaced with the bundle of the blank papers from which currency notes were stolen. As per the recovery memo, out of the amount stolen, Rs. 1,00,000/- has been recovered from the son of the applicant and Rs. 1,00,000/- from Bimal Das alias Kamal Gupta. It is also disclosed in the 2 recovery memo that the stolen money was shared by the said two with applicant Promod Sarkar and Kamal Gupta. Considering the facts and circumstances and the gravity of the offence, it is not a fit case for bail. The bail application is rejected. (Prafulla C. Pant, J.) Dt. 12.10.2006 S