1 S.B.Cr.Misc. II Bail App. No. 3945/07 (Umar Vs. State of Rajasthan) Date of order : 23/08/2007 HON'BLE MR.H.R.PANWAR, J. Mr. Shambhoo Singh for the petitioner. Mr. V.R.Mehta Public Prosecutor. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the Public Prosecutor for the State. Perused the order impugned. It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that similarly situated co-accused Vahid, Pankaj and Ismile have already been granted bail and the case of the petitioner is not distinguishable from the case of these co-accused who have already been enlarged on bail. The witnesses to the recovery of Bat and knife namely PW-16 Purushottam and PW-17 Gunwant did not support the prosecution case. I have carefully gone through the statements of these two witnesses. These witnesses did not support the recovery, on the contrary stated that nothing has been recovered in their presence from the present petitioner. Looking to the facts and circumstances of the case and the fact that prosecution witnesses did not support the prosecution case so far as incriminating evidence of recovery is concerned as also the fact that similarly situated co-accused have been granted bail, having considered the oral arguments advanced by both the parties, I think it just and proper to enlarge the accused petitioner on bail. 2 Accordingly, this second bail application filed under Sec. 439 Cr.P.C. is allowed and it is directed that petitioner Umar S/o Shri Ameen Khan Pathan be released on bail in FIR No. 77/05 P.S. Dhambola, provided he executes a personal bond for a sum of Rs. 20,000/- with two sound and solvent sureties in the sum of Rs. 10,000/- 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. (H.R.PANWAR), J. RP