S.B.CR. MISC. IIND BAIL APPLICATION NO.9584/2008 SHANKER SAINI @ KALU VS. STATE OF RAJ. 15.12.2008 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MAHESH BHAGWATI Mr. Biri Singh, for the petitioner. Mr. BK Sharma,Public Prosecutor for the State. This order governs the disposal of second bail application filed by Shri Biri Singh, Advocate on behalf of the applicant Shanker Saini @ Kalu pertaining to F.I.R. No. 325/2008 of Police Station Harmara, District Jaipur in the offences under Sections 147, 148, 323, 427 and 307 of IPC. Heard the learned counsel for the accused petitioner, learned Public Prosecutor appearing for the State and perused the relevant material on record including the earlier bail order dated 21st of October, 2008 passed by this Court. Learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that he was arrested on 29th of August, 2008 and since then he has been in custody. The police report under Section 173 (2) of Cr.P.C. has been filed by the police after completion of investigation and the matter is pending trial. So far as the pendency of number of cases is concerned, all the offences are of trivial nature and he is not alleged to have been involved in any offence of grave nature like that of murder, dacoity etc. Hence, in view of this position, he may be granted an opportunity to reform himself after being released on bail. The learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the bail petition. It is very pertinent to mention here that the first bail petition filed on behalf of the accused was disposed of after considering the -2- material available on record. There is no substantial change in the facts and circumstances of the case. Albeit, the learned counsel for the accused petitioner has fairly conceded that the petitioner has been involved in as many as 14 criminal cases pending in different courts, but his submission is that they are of base and compatible nature . I am afraid that inspite of this fact situation that he has been involved in 14 criminal cases which are pending in different courts shall he be allowed to commit more offences posing a serious threat to the society. The matter is still at the initial stage of trial and I do not find any good ground to change my earlier view. Thus, the second bail petition filed on behalf of the accused petitioner also deserves to be dismissed. In the result, the second bail petition filed on behalf of the accused petitioner Shanker Lal @ Kalu S/o Shri Sohan Lal under Section 439 of Cr.P.C stands dismissed. (MAHESH BHAGWATI)J. PCG