IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. CR.MISC.BAIL APPLICATION NO.6661/2010 Mukesh Vs. State of Rajasthan Date of order : 26/07/2010. HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAMMAD RAFIQ Mr. Manoj Sharma for accused petitioner Mr. G.S.Rathore,Public Prosecutor for the State Mr. Amit Zindal for the complainant ****** Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Public Prosecutor for the State and learned counsel for the complainant and perused the relevant documents placed before me. Contention of the learned counsel for the accused petitioner is that the petitioner has been falsely involved in the present case, inasmuch there is no allegation against the petitioner of causing any injury on the person of injured or using any weapon. It is alleged that he used fists and legs and an omnibus allegation is made against the petitioner and some of the accused at the close of the FIR that they were also responsible for causing injuries to the injured. Learned counsel frankly conceded that one more case involving offence under Sections 153 and 457 IPC is pending against the petitioner. Excepting this, no other criminal case is pending against him. It is a case of false and over implication. Petitioner has been in jail for quite some time. On the other hand, learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the bail applications. Considering the rival submissions and without expressing any opinion on the merits of this case but taking into consideration all the facts and circumstances of the case, I deem it just and appropriate to enlarge the petitioner on bail during trial. Resultantly, the bail application u/S.439 Cr.P.C. is allowed and it is directed that petitioner Mukesh S/O Shri Sukha shall be released on bail in F.I.R. No. 266/2010 of P.S. Kotwali, Bundi on his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- together with two sureties in the sum of Rs.25,000/- each to the satisfaction of the trial Court for his appearance before that court on all dates of hearing and as and when called upon to do so till conclusion of the trial. However, it is made clear that in case the petitioner is again found indulging in similar or any other offence at any point of time in future, the bail granted to him by this court in the present case and in another pending cases against him, would be liable to be cancelled at the instance of the prosecution on this ground alone and stipulation to this effect shall be inserted in the bail bonds produced by the petitioner, and the sureties to be produced in support thereof shall be verified by the Tehsildar of the area concerned. (MOHAMMAD RAFIQ), J. Thanvi