JUDGMENT 1. - Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor for the State. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that recovery has been done from Vikas and two other persons Abdul Shekh and Abdul Sal' ." were ran away from spot. He further states that no recovery has been done from the present accused-petitioner. There is only allegation that they brought these contraband articles from the present accused-petitioner. Only 'tripal' and 'taraju' has been recovered from the present-accused petitioner on the information. This part of the information cannot be read against this accused-petitioner, therefore, bail may be granted. Learned Public Prosecutor opposed this bail application. 3. I have considered the rival arguments made by both the parties. Looking to all the facts and circumstances of the case as also the fact that there is no legal evidence which connect the accused-petitioner with the crime, I deem it just and proper to enlarge the accused-petitioner on bail. 4. Accordingly, the bail application under Section 439 Cr.PC. is allowed and it is ordered that the accused-petitioner Gotu Lal S/o Modi Ram shall be enlarged on bail provided he furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 20,000/- with two sureties of Rs. 10,000/- each to the satisfaction of the learned trial Judge for his appearance before the court concerned on all the dates of hearing as and when called upon to do so.Bail allowed. *******