JUDGMENT Anil Verma, J. - Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 2. This is the Eleventh bail application under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 filed on behalf of the applicant for grant of bail. The applicant is in custody since 28.03.2017 in connection with Crime No.804/2016, registered at Police Station Neelganga, District Ujjain (M.P.) for commission of offence punishable under Sections 420, 406, 120-B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. 3. Applicant's earlier 1st, 3rd, 4th, 5th, 8th, 9th and 10th bail applications have been dismissed vide order dated 03/05/2017, 10/01/2018, 14/03/2018, 14/11/2018, 28/07/2021, 25/02/2022 and 12/12/2022, respectively. 4. As per prosecution story, the applicant firm i.e. M/s Om Sai Om Developers entered into an agreement with the complainant for sale of flat no. B-504 and received some of Rs. 24 lakhs from the complainant and later on said flat has been sold to some other person and against said sum of Rs. 24 lakhs no agreement was executed and only a receipt was given for said amount to the complainant. 5. Learned Senior Counsel contended that the applicant is an innocent person and he has been falsely implicated in this offence. He is in custody since 28.03.2017 and suffered jail incarceration for more than 6 years out of the total prescribed sentence for the aforesaid offence which is of seven years. He is facing trial for offence under Sections 420, 406, 120-B of IPC and suffered more than 90% of the maximum sentence. Counsel has placed reliance upon the judgment delivered by Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Satendra Kumar Antil Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation reported in 2022 Live Law SC 577 in support of his contention. Final conclusion of the trial is likely to take sufficient long time. Under the above circumstances, prayer for grant of bail may be considered on such terms and conditions, as this Court deems fit and proper. 6. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent / State opposes the bail application and prays for its rejection by submitting that earlier applications of the applicant have been dismissed on merits and thereafter, there is no material change in circumstances in which the present application be considered. Perused the impugned order of the trial Court as well as the case diary. Perused the impugned order of the trial Court as well as the case diary. After considering all the facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of offence and also taking note of the fact that the applicant has suffered more than 6 years out of the maximum sentence of seven years prescribed under the aforesaid offences, and final conclusion of the trial will take sufficient long time and in the light of the judgment delivered by Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Satendra Kumar Antil (Supra), I deem it proper to release the applicant on bail. Therefore, without commenting on the merits of the case, the application is allowed. 7. It is directed that applicant be released on bail on his furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One lakh Only) with one solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court for his appearance before the trial Court, as and when required. He shall abide by all the conditions enumerated under Section 437(3) Cr.P.C. 8. Certified copy as per rules.