ORDER
K.C. Gupta
1. According to the prosecution case it was Raj (SIC)
who had threatened to set on fire the shop of Rajesh Kumar
complainant. P.W.7 Bhopal Singh has stated in his statem
that on 8.1.2000 at about 11/12 midnight, he had seen
Mahabir, Kuka and Raj Pal standing near the shop to Raj
situated in the area of village Didwara. The door of the
shop was open. He further stated that Raj Pal accused (SIC)
having a Canny containing petrol while Kuka accused was
with a lathi. Mahabir accused was having a match box in
hand, he further stated that Raj Pal accused sprinkled
petrol in the shop while Mahabir lit the fire. Thus, no
has been attributed to Kukar and it is only stated that h
present there armed with a lathi. Therefore, keeping in
the facts and circumstances of the case the sentence (SIC)
fine is suspended qua Kuka appellant. Let he be admitted
bail to the satisfaction of C.J.M. Jind.