IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR ORDER IN S.B. Cr. Misc. Bail Application No.5858/2010 Suresh Vs. The State of Rajasthan through Public Prosecutor Date of Order ::: 08.07.2010 Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mohammad Rafiq Shri S.K. Jain, Counsel for petitioner Shri Amit Punia, Public Prosecutor #### By the Court:-
Heard learned counsel for petitioner as well as learned Public Prosecutor and perused the material made available to me during the arguments of the case.
Learned counsel for petitioner argued that the petitioner should be enlarged on bail because the first version, that was given by the informant in the FIR that the petitioner was author of the fatal injury by ‘gandasi’ on the head of the deceased Ramesh, has been disowned by the informant himself in his statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C., wherein he stated that it was Prakash who caused this fatal injury and not the petitioner Suresh. Learned counsel submitted that other injured witnesses also made similar statement.
Learned Public Prosecutor opposed the bail application.
Having regard to the fact that in the first information report the petitioner has been named as an assailant of causing fatal injury, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. However, he would be at liberty to again apply for bail before the court below itself after the statement of informant Chhitar Lal is recorded.
The prosecution is directed to produce informant Chhitar Lal as witness on priority basis.
With that liberty, the bail application is dismissed.
(Mohammad Rafiq) J.
//Jaiman//