IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR ORDER IN S.B. Cr. Misc. 2nd Bail Application No.6559/2010 Gopal @ Gopal Saini Vs. The State of Rajasthan through Public Prosecutor Date of Order ::: 25.08.2010 Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mohammad Rafiq Shri Anil Kumar, Counsel for petitioner Shri N.R. Saran, Public Prosecutor #### By the Court:- On hearing learned counsel for petitioner and learned Public Prosecutor, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail because the learned court of Sessions, while rejecting the bail application of the petitioner has observed that the petitioner would be at liberty to again apply for bail after the statements of complainants Nemichand and Shyamlal are recorded. Learned counsel for petitioner referred to the statement of Ramniwas recorded under Section 161 of the Code of Criminal Procedure to argue that in fact the matter was compromised in between the parties and the money was paid by the petitioner to the complainant, which was received back by him. Having regard to the nature of the allegation against the petitioner, I am not inclined at this stage to enlarge the petitioner on bail. However, the prosecution is directed to get examined the witnesses, namely, Nemichand, Shyamlal and Ramniwas. The petitioner would be at liberty to again apply for bail before the Court of Sessions itself after the statements of those witnesses are recorded. The bail application is rejected. (Mohammad Rafiq) J. //Jaiman//