Het Singh Yadav, J.;— Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. and perused the record. 2. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case. In fact, after drawing the money from the Bank the applicant went to his house in some urgency. In the meantime, F.I.R. was lodged against him and it is alleged that the entire amount was recovered from him. This shows that the F.I.R. was lodged in this case in haste and the applicant unnecessarily arraigned in this case. The applicant is in jail since 5.5.2012. The Investigating Officer has already filed charge-sheet in the matter. Therefore, the applicant deserves to be enlarged on bail. 3. Learned A.G.A. opposed the bail application. However it is not disputed by him that entire amount has already been recovered from the applicant and the co-accused. 4. Considering the points pertaining to the nature of accusation, prima facie satisfaction regarding proposed evidence and severity of punishment raised as above by the learned counsel of both the sides and on perusal of record, the Court is of the view that the applicant deserves to be enlarged on bail. 5. Let applicant-Abdulla involved in the Case Crime No. 300 of 2012 under Sections 406, 411 I.P.C. Police Station-Cantt, District-Gorakhpur be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions that: (i) He will mark his attendance at Police Station-concerned once in the first week of every calendar month during the trial. (ii) He shall not intimidate any witnesses in any manner. (iii) He will co-operate in the trial and will remain present before the trial Court on the date fixed in the matter. (iv) He will not mis-use the liberty of the bail and will not repeat any such incident in future. 6. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the trial Court will be at liberty to cancel the bail of the applicant. _____________