1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN JAIPUR BENCH, JAIPUR ORDER SB Cr Misc Bail Application No. 6983/2010 Barkat Vs State of Rajasthan 11.8.2010 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MN BHANDARI Mr MK Kaushik - for the petitioner Mr Amit Poonia - Public Prosecutor BY THE COURT: I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is implicated only for the reason that allegations exist against his relative Yasin Khan, otherwise, he is nothing to do with this case. If, at all, cases are pending against Yasin Khan then also petitioner has no nexus with it. Thus, petitioner may be granted benefit of anticipatory bail. Learned PP has opposed the bail application. He submits that investigation is yet to be made in the case, more so, 2 cases are pending against co-accused Yasin Khan and it is with the connivance of the petitioner occurrence was given cause. Thus, petitioner may not be granted benefit of bail. After considering rival submissions of the parties and without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, which may otherwise affect outcome of the trial, looking to the facts of this case, I am not inclined to grant bail under section 438 CrPC to the petitioner. Accordingly, the bail application is rejected. However, petitioner is given liberty to surrender before the Magistrate concerned. If he surrenders and file bail application, then it may be decided expeditiously and, if possible, on the same day. (MN BHANDARI), J. bnsharma