JUDGMENT
Gopal Krishna Sharma, J.
1. Heard. Shri Dhankar argued that the accused was arrested on 27-2-1987 and since then he is in jail. The challan has been submitted but the case has not been committed. It was also argued that on the basis of his statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.PC he has been arrested. It was also argued that the co-accused who have been arrested by the Police have been released on bail by this Court.
2. Shri Tyagi opposed the bail application and argued that the main two accused persons who have been named by himself in his statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.PC are at large and if he be released on bail, then the cause of the prosecution would be hampered.
3. Considered the arguments. The accused was arrested on 27-2-1987 and since then he is facing the agony as the case has not been committed by the committing Magistrate to the Sessions Court. Under such circumstances, without going into the merits of this case I feel that the accused may be enlarged on bail. As the accused is the resident of Punjab and as Shri Tyagi stated that he has no permanent residential house or any property in Punjab according to his information, if this court is inclined to release him on bail then heavy bail may be taken. The contention of Shri Tyagi is reasonable. The petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on furnishing two sureties of Rs. 15,000/- each and personal bond on Rs. 30,000/- to the satisfaction of ACJM, C.B.I. Jaipur.