JUDGMENT Rohit arya, J. - This is second repeat bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. filed on behalf of the applicant. His first bail application was dismissed as withdrawn vide order dt.14.12.2021 passed in M.Cr.C. No.61136/2021 with liberty to revive the prayer after three weeks. 2. The applicant is in custody since 27.11.2021 in connection with Crime No.351/2020 registered at P.S. Morar, District Gwalior (M.P.) for the offences punishable under Sections 394, 411 IPC and 11/13 of MPDVPK act. 3. As per prosecution story, when the complainant was coming back home, after duty at Hurawali Power Station, on his motorcycle bearing number MP-07/MX-6379 Bajaj CT 100 on 08.07.2020, in route via national highway near Ganesh Dhabha co-accused persons Harendra, Pavan Jatav and Ramnaresh Pal, riding on a motorcyle, intercepted him. They caught hold of him, hit with fists and kicks and looted his mobile and Rs.3,000/-. During the course of investigation, it has come on surface that the mobile phone bearing SIM No.6265154950 (JIO) and SIM No.7697908579 (airTel) has been recovered from the present applicant who is the uncle of co-accused Harendra. accordingly, the case has been registered. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated. He has no criminal antecedents. Neither he was on the spot nor has he been named in the FIR. There is no TIP conducted. Even otherwise, applicant is aged about 60 years and is in jail since 27.11.2021. Due to his jail incarceration, his family is in penury and on the verge of starvation. Looking to the Covid-19 situation, trial is not likely to conclude early in the near future. Hence, the applicant may be enlarged on bail on such terms and conditions this Court deems fit and proper. 5. Per contra, learned Panel Lawyer opposes the bail application supporting the order impugned with the submission that the factum of recovery of mobile phone from the applicant is sufficient to establish the complicity of the applicant in the crime. Hence, no exception can be taken in the matter of enlargement of applicant on bail. 6. 5. Per contra, learned Panel Lawyer opposes the bail application supporting the order impugned with the submission that the factum of recovery of mobile phone from the applicant is sufficient to establish the complicity of the applicant in the crime. Hence, no exception can be taken in the matter of enlargement of applicant on bail. 6. Upon hearing learned counsel for the rival parties but without commenting upon the rival contentions touching merits of the case, regard being had to the fact that neither the applicant has been named in the FIR nor in the memo of co-accused persons recorded under Section 27 Evidence act, besides there are no criminal antecedents, he is aged about 60 years, in the light of the liberty extended to him in the earlier bail application to revive his prayer after three weeks and due to Covid-19 pandemic, the possibility of delay in conclusion of trial cannot be ruled out. Hence, the applicant is held entitled for enlargement on bail but with stringent conditions. 7. Consequently, the application of the applicant filed under Section 439 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 is hereby allowed. It is directed that the applicant be released on bail on furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs.1,50,000/-(Rupees One Lac Fifty Thousand only) with one solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court and on the condition that he shall remain present before the Court concerned during trial and also comply with the conditions enumerated under Section 437 (3) of Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 with following further conditions: (i) the applicant shall mark his attendance before the concerned police station on 2nd and 4th Saturday every month between 10:00 a.m. to 12:00 noon. (ii) the applicant shall abide by the terms and conditions of various circulars and orders issued by the Government of India and the State Government as well as the local administration from time-to-time in the matter of maintaining social distancing, physical distancing, hygiene, etc., to avoid proliferation of Novel Corona virus (COVID-19); (iii) the concerned jail authorities are directed that before releasing the applicant, the medical examination of the applicant be conducted through the jail doctor and if it is prima facie found that he is having any symptoms of COVID-19, then the consequential follow up action or any further test required, be undertaken immediately. If not, the applicant shall be released on bail in terms of the conditions imposed in this order; (iv) on violation of conditions, State is free to apply for cancellation of bail. (v) in future, if the applicant is found to be involved in such nature of cases or any other similar criminal cases or misuses the bail granted by this Court, this bail order shall stand cancelled automatically. 8. Learned Panel Lawyer is directed to send an e-copy of this order to all the concerned including the concerned Station House Officer of the Police Station for information and necessary action. Certified copy as per rules.