- (1.) HEARD learned counsel for petitioners,learned Public Prosecutor as well as learned counsel for complainant and perused the material made available to me during the arguments of the case.
(2.) CONTENTION of learned counsel for petitioners is that originally allegation of causing firearm injury was attributed to accused-Bholu by informant Ravinder Singh but injured Pratap in his statement recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. attributed this gun fire injury to accused Shrawan. Learned counsel argued that so far accused Sultan Singh is concerned, there is no allegation against him of causing injury to any of two injured. Learned Public Prosecutor and learned counsel for complainant opposed the bail application and submitted that Ravinder Singh has still maintained that it was Bholu who was responsible for opening fire and that the court statement of injured Pratap is still to be recorded. Having regard to arguments of learned counsel for parties, I am not inclined to enlarge accused-petitioner Bholu in Bail Application No.11607/2010, on bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C. Hence his bail application is accordingly rejected. After considering all facts and circumstances of case and without expressing any opinion on its merits and demerits, I deem it just and proper to release accused-petitioner, namely, Sultan Singh Son of Shri Lotan Singh, Resident of Village Dhorya, Police Station Basedi, District Dholpur (presently confined in District Jail, Dholpur) on bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C., in FIR No.192/2010, Police Station Baseri, Dholpur, for offence under Sections 143, 323, 341, 336 and 307 IPC, provided he furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.30,000/- with two sureties of Rs.15000/- each to the satisfaction of trial court for his appearance on all subsequent dates of hearing and as and when called upon to do so. The bail application No.407/2011 is accordingly allowed.;