1 S.B. Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.3765/2006 Date : 06.09.2006. HON'BLE MR. SATYA PRAKASH PATHAK, J. Mr. J.R. Beniwal for the applicants. Mr. V.R. Mehta, Public Prosecutor. Mr. N.S. Rathore for complainant. I have heard learned counsel for the applicants as well as the learned Public Prosecutor for the State assisted by learned counsel for the complainant and carefully gone through the impugned order. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that he does not want to press the bail application of applicant No.1 Manoj. However, he submits that bail application of applicant No.2 Jhindu may be considered. On the other hand, learned Public Prosecutor assisted by learned counsel for the complainant opposed the bail application of applicant No.2 Jhindu. 2 I have considered the submissions made before me and carefully perused the material available on record. Taking into consideration the overall facts and circumstances of the present case, I think it just and proper to enlarge the accused applicant No.2 Jhindu on bail. Accordingly, the bail application filed under Sec. 439 Cr.P.C. is allowed and it is directed that the applicant No.2 Jhindu son of Mohar Singh shall be released on bail in FIR No.63/2006 P.S. Sidhmukh, provided he executes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.30,000/- with two sound and solvent sureties in the sum of Rs.15,000/- each to the satisfaction of learned trial court for his appearance before that court on each and every date of hearing and whenever called upon to do so till the completion of the trial. The bail application of applicant No.1 Manoj stands dismissed as not pressed. (SATYA PRAKASH PATHAK), J. vij