IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. Cr.M.P.(M) No. 735 of 2011. Date of decision : 27.9.2011. ____________________________________________________________ Kuldeep Kumar alias Guddu. …Petitioner. Versus State of Himachal Pradesh. . …Respondent. Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Kuldip Singh, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? No For the Petitioner : Mr. R.K.Gautam, Senior Advocate with Mr. Mehar Chand, Advocate. For the Respondent : Ms. Ruma Kaushik, Additional Advocate General with Mr. J.S.Rana, Assistant Advocate General. Kuldip Singh, Judge (Oral). This is an application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. for releasing the applicant on bail in FIR No. 172 of 2011 dated 10.8.2011, registered at Police Station, Nalagarh, District Solan, under Section 379 IPC. The status report filed and the same has been perused. 2. It has been stated in the application that the applicant was arrested on 10.8.2011 and since then he is in custody. The applicant and co-accused filed bail application which was rejected by the Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Nalagarh on 18.8.2011. The applicant and co-accused then filed Cr.M.P.(M) No. 653 of 2011 in this Court __________________ 1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the Judgment ? yes 2 and on 1.9.2011 this Court granted bail to co-accused Dharmender but the bail application of the applicant was rejected. 3. The investigation in the case is complete and, therefore, the presence of the applicant is not necessary for further investigation. The applicant is innocent. The co-accused Dharmender has been released on bail. The applicant is ready to furnish bail bonds. The prayer has been made for releasing the applicant on bail. 4. The bail application has been opposed by the learned Additional Advocate General on the basis of status report. It has been stated that the bail application of the applicant and co-accused was decided by this Court on 1.9.2011 and the bail application of the applicant was rejected. 5. I have heard both the sides and perused the record. It has been stated in the status report that on the basis of disclosure statement made by the applicant ` 2,000/-were recovered from him. It has also been stated that after committing the offence on 7.8.2011 the accused again came to Nalagarh on 10.8.2011 for committing another similar type of offence. The bail application of the applicant has been rejected on 1.9.2011. There is no change of circumstance after 1.9.2011 at this stage. Hence, the bail application is dismissed. 6. The observations made in this judgment are for disposal of bail application only and the same shall not be construed as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case. September 27, 2011. (Kuldip Singh) (GR) Judge.