Cr.M.P.(M) No.1385 of 2008 9.1.2009 Present: Mr. M. S. Chandel, Senior Advocate, assisted by Mr. N.S. Chandel, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr.J.S.Guleria, Law officer, for the respondent-State. The petitioner herein has been arrested under sections 147, 148, 149, 341, 323, 324 and 302 of the Indian Penal Code in Case FIR No. 235 of 2008 dated 10.6.2008 registered at Police Station, Una, as such the present application has been moved under section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Notice of this application was given to the respondent-State. Mr. J. S. Guleria, Learned Law Officer, put in appearance on its behalf, filed the report and objected to the grant of bail to the petitioner. The petitioner is presently in judicial lock up. The challan has been presented in the court charges have been framed and the case is now fixed for the prosecution evidence in the last week of January, 2009. Heard and gone through the record. In brief the prosecution case is that on 10.6.2008 at about 2.30 p.m. the petitioner along with Pardeep Kumar, Sandeep Kumar sons of Jagdev Singh and Neel Kanth son of Prithi are alleged to have assaulted the deceased (Ram Kumar) and murdered in broad day light in village Jakhra. Pradeep Kumar was armed with an axe and Sandeep Kumar with a Darat (a cutting instrument). Accused Pradeep Kumar is alleged to have inflicted a blow on the arm of the deceased Ram Kumar and hit him with the back side of the axe on his head and Sandeep Kumar inflicted injury on his arm. These injuries proved to be fatal and Ram Kumar died on the way while taking to the hospital. The petitioner along with other co-accused was arrested on 13.6.2008. On the perusal of the statements of the alleged eye witnesses, recorded under section 161 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, it shows that the petitioner who is said to be 70 years of age, walks with the assistance of a stick. The deceased was allegedly dragged by the c-accused and the role attributed to the petitioner is that he pushed him with a tip of the stick. The deceased was a young man of 35 years of age and he could not have been in-capacitated by the petitioner keeping in view his old age. However, I refrain myself from making any expression on the merits and demerits of the case, it may prejudice the case either of the parties. It is suffice to say that the petitioner has a case for bail. Accordingly, his request for bail is allowed and the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on his executing bonds in the amount of Rs.25,000/- with one surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Una. The bail shall be subject to the following conditions that the petitioner shall: a) make himself available and attend the court whenever required to do so; b) not directly or indirectly make any inducement threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case, so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer; c) not misuse the liberty of bail in any manner Needless to say that infraction of any of the condition would disentitle him from the liberty of bail. Any observation made herein above, shall not be construed to have any expression or opinion on the merits of the case. The trial court shall decide the case on its own merits. An authenticated copy of this order be sent to the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Una, for information and necessary action at his end. Copy Dasti on usual charges. January 9, 2009 (Surinder Singh),J. (D)