ORDER : SONIA GOKANI, J. 1. Learned advocate for the applicants does not press this application qua applicant No. 1, which is being permitted. Present application stands disposed of as withdrawn qua applicant No. 1. 2. So far as the applicant No. 2 is concerned, present application is preferred by him under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for regular bail in connection with IC.R No. 202 of 2017 registered with Kamrej Police Station, District Surat for the offences punishable under Sections 394, 506(2) and 114 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 135 of the Gujarat Police Act. 3. Learned advocate, Mr. N.M Patel for the applicants has submitted that there is no recovery or discovery from applicant No. 2. The money i.e said to have been recovered is not having any specific identity. It is further urged that applicant No. 2 has no criminal antecedent and leniency be shown by the Court. 4. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor, Ms. Pathak for respondent-State has resisted the same on the ground that investigation is going on. She has further urged that granting regular bail to this applicant also needs to be viewed from the impact on the society. 5. Having heard learned advocates for both the sides as well as considering the nature of accusation made in the complaint and the alleged role attributed to the applicant No. 2, in the papers of investigation presented before this Court, when perused for the purpose of appreciating the submissions of both the sides, this Court notices prima facie that in the recovery of Rs. 5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand Only) without any specific identification mark of the money, there is a very thin evidence to connect applicant No. 2 with the crime in question. In the Test Identification Parade also, nothing substantial qua applicant No. 2 has been noticed. With no criminal antecedent, his case deserves to be considered for the regular bail. 6. Again, the applicant No. 2, being permanent resident of State of Gujarat, procuring his presence at the time of trial is not difficult. With the stringent conditions discretion deserves to be exercised. 7. In view of aforesaid, the present application is allowed and applicant No. 2 is ordered to be released on regular bail in connection with I-C.R No. 202 of 2017 registered with Kamrej Police Station, District Surat, on his executing a solvent surety of Rs. With the stringent conditions discretion deserves to be exercised. 7. In view of aforesaid, the present application is allowed and applicant No. 2 is ordered to be released on regular bail in connection with I-C.R No. 202 of 2017 registered with Kamrej Police Station, District Surat, on his executing a solvent surety of Rs. 30,000/- (Rupees Thirty Thousand only) with one surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court and subject to the conditions that he shall: [a] not take undue advantage of liberty or misuse liberty; [b] not tamper with any evidence, and/or documents nor act in a manner injurious to the interest of the prosecution; [c] surrender his passport, if any, to the trial court within a week from the date of his release; [d] not leave the State of Gujarat without prior permission of this Court; [e] mark his presence between 11:00a.m and 02:00 p.m before the concerned Police Station on the 1st and 15th day of every English calendar month for six months; [f] furnish the present address of his residence to the Investigating Officer and also to the Court at the time of execution of the bond and shall not change the residence without prior permission of this Court; [g] any repeat offence will entitle the prosecution to make a request for cancellation of regular bail; [h] not enter the revenue limits of District Surat till the trial is over. 8. The authorities will release applicant No. 2 only if he is not required in connection with any other offence for the time being. If breach of any of the above conditions is committed, the trial court concerned will be at liberty to issue warrant or take appropriate action in the matter. 9. Bail bond to be executed before the trial court having jurisdiction to try the case. 10. At the trial, the trial Court shall not be influenced by the observations of preliminary nature qua the evidence at this stage made by this Court while enlarging the applicant No. 2 on bail. 11. Rule qua applicant No. 2 is made absolute to the aforesaid extent. Rule qua applicant No. 1 is discharged. Direct service is permitted.