JUDGMENT : I.A. No.12728 of 2024 1. The instant interlocutory application has been preferred under Section 21(5) of the N.I.A. Act for condoning the delay of 41 days in preferring the instant appeal. 2. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 3. Considering the reason assigned in the interlocutory application and taking into consideration the purport of Section 21 (5) of the National Investigation Agency Act , 2008, the delay of 41 days in preferring the appeal is hereby condoned. 4. Accordingly, I.A. No.12728 of 2024 stands allowed. Cr. Appeal (DB) No.1559 of 2024 1. The instant appeal preferred under Section 21 (4) of the National Investigation Agency Act , is directed against the order dated 13.08.2024 passed in MCA No.1473 of 2024, in connection with S.T. Case No.604 of 2023, arising out of Pirtand P.S. Case No.12 of 2010, registered for the offence under Sections 302/34 of the IPC, Section 17 of the C.L.A. Act and Section 13 of the U.A.(P) Act, whereby and whereunder, the prayer for regular bail of the appellant has been rejected. 2. It has been contended on behalf of the appellant that the appellant is absolutely innocent and has falsely been implicated in the instant case. 3. It has further been contended that the charge-sheet has already been submitted and the appellant is languishing in custody since 23.08.2023. 4. It has also been contended that the identically placed co-accused person, namely, Nabi Mian @ Shamsher @ Master has already been directed to be released on bail by the coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 10.10.2022 passed in Cr. Appeal (DB) No.892 of 2022. 5. While on the other hand, learned Addl. Public Prosecutor appearing for the State, has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail. However, she is fair enough to admit the fact that the case of the aforesaid co-accused person as referred above, who has already been directed to be released on bail by the coordinate Bench of this Court, is identically placed to that of the case of the present appellant. 6. After having heard the learned counsel for the parties, this Court, is of the view that identically placed co-accused person, namely, Nabi Mian @ Shamsher @ Master has already been directed to be released on bail by the coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 10.10.2022 passed in Cr. 6. After having heard the learned counsel for the parties, this Court, is of the view that identically placed co-accused person, namely, Nabi Mian @ Shamsher @ Master has already been directed to be released on bail by the coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 10.10.2022 passed in Cr. Appeal (DB) No.892 of 2022, therefore, there is no reason to take distinct view, so far as the case of the present appellant is concerned. 7. Moreover, the appellant is languishing in custody since 23.08.2023. 8. Considering the aforesaid fact, this Court is of the view that the impugned order needs to be interfered with. 9. Accordingly, the impugned order dated 13.08.2024 passed in MCA No.1473 of 2024 by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge-I, Giridih, is hereby quashed and set aside. 10. In view thereof, the instant appeal stands allowed. 11. In consequence thereof, the appellant, above named, is directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned District & Addl. Sessions Judge-I, Giridih, in connection with S.T. Case No.604 of 2023, arising out of Pirtand P.S. Case No.12 of 2010, subject to the conditions that the appellant shall co-operate in the trial and shall not absent himself on the date fixed without any cogent cause; and shall not commit offence of the like nature. In failure, the learned court shall have liberty to pass appropriate order in accordance with law so that trial, be not hindered and further that one of the bailors should be close relative of the appellant, which is to be accompanied by affidavit justifying that such bailor is close relative of the appellant. 12. Accordingly, the instant appeal stands disposed of.