1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. CR.MISC.BAIL APPLICATION NO.4137/2010 Sumit Agarwal Vs. State Date of order : 19/5/2010. HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAMMAD RAFIQ Shri Deepak Asopa for the petitioner. Shri Amit Punia, P.P. for the State. ****** Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Public Prosecutor for the State and perused the relevant documents placed before me. Contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that petitioner and one Raj Kumar were both accused of committing offences under Section 420, 467, 468, 471 and 120B of IPC. The FIR was lodged with the delay of seven months from the date of alleged withdrawal of the amount and that there is no evidence against the petitioner to connect him with the crime. As per the own assertion, the amount was released by the bank only by comparing the signature contained on the cheque with the admitted signature of the account holder complainant. This Court has already enlarged co-accused Raj Kumar in S.B. Cr. Misc. Bail Appl. No.2078/2010 vide order dated 24.2.2010 who too was arrested with the petitioner on 12.2.2010. Now thereafter challan has been filed in the present case. No recovery has been made from the petitioner. Trial of the 2 case is likely to take long time. Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the bail application, but could not point out any distinction between the case of the petitioner and co-accused Raj Kumar. Without expressing any opinion on the merits of this case but taking into consideration all the facts and circumstances of the case, I deem it appropriate to enlarge the petitioner on bail. In the result, this bail application u/S.439 Cr.P.C. is allowed and it is directed that petitioner Sumit Agarwal S/o Virendra Agarwal shall be released on bail in F.I.R. No.30/2010, P.S. Ashok Nagar, Jaipur on his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.30,000/- together with two sureties in the sum of Rs.15,000/- each to the satisfaction of the trial Court for his appearance before that court on all dates of hearing and as and when called upon to do so till conclusion of the trial. (MOHAMMAD RAFIQ), J. RS/