ORDER 1. This is second bail application filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1973. 2. The first bail application M.Cr.C.No.10856/2022 was dismissed as withdrawn vide order dated 4/03/2022 but at that time, a charge-sheet was not filed. When charge-sheet is filed, then the applicant has filed this repeat application. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the learned court of 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Maihar, District Satna granted bail to main accused Ajay @ Guddu Mishra from whom stolen property was recovered vide order dated 12/02/2022 purely on caste lines whereas bail application of the present applicant was dismissed, though he was made an accused on the basis of memorandum of co-accused Ajay Mishra and no recovery has been made from him. 4. It is further submitted that there is a criminal history of six cases against co-accused Ajay Mishra whereas criminal history of ten cases against the present applicant and like Ajay Mishra, there is no order of conviction in any of the pending cases against the present applicant as has been mentioned qua Ajay Mishra. It is pointed out that learned Additional Sessions Judge has exercised the discretion in an arbitrary and illegal manner. 5. Before expressing any opinion it will be pendent to quote relevant portion of consideration of bail application made by learned Additional Session Judge in case of Ajay @ Guddu Mishra in bail application No.45/2022 decided on 12.02.2022. 6. Material on which consideration was bestowed by the concerned Additional Sessions Judge while dismissing the application No.54/2022 vide order dated 21.02.2022. 7. Taking into consideration the material reproduced above, it is a fact that the learned 1st Additional Sessions Judge Prashant Shukla had granted bail to the co- accused from whose possession, a stolen property was recovered but denied bail to the present applicant, prima facie substantiates the allegations made by learned counsel for the applicant. 8. Considering the fact that case of the present applicant is on better footing than Ajay @ Guddu Mishra from whom, a stolen property was recovered, the bail is extended to the present applicant. In view of such facts, the application is allowed. 9. 8. Considering the fact that case of the present applicant is on better footing than Ajay @ Guddu Mishra from whom, a stolen property was recovered, the bail is extended to the present applicant. In view of such facts, the application is allowed. 9. It is directed that applicant be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty five Thousand Only) with two solvent sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Trial Court concerned for his appearance before the said Court on all such dates as may be fixed in this regard during pendency of the trial. The applicant shall abide by the conditions as enumerated under Section 437(3) of Cr.P.C. This order shall be effective till the end of the trial, however, in case of bail jump and breach of any of the pre-condition of bail, it shall become ineffective. 10. In view of the outbreak of new mutant Omicron of COVID-19, the jail authorities and the State Government are directed to follow the guidelines issued by the Health Ministry in the wake of Novel Corona Virus/Omicron virus before and after releasing the applicant. 11. Let warning be issued to the concerned Judge Shri Prashant Shukla, First Additional Session Judge, Maihar, District Satna and copy of this order and warning be placed in his service book to be more cautious and judicious in his approach in future so that image of the judiciary can be saved and such allegations of casteism and bias are not allowed to be levied so to tarnish collective image of judiciary.