S.B.CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION NO.4724/2006 Date : 20.10.2006 HON'BLE MR. SATYA PRAKASH PATHAK, J. Mr. Vijay Bishnoi for the applicant. Mr. K.L. Thakur, AAG for the State. Mr. Ranjeet Joshi for the complainant. I have heard learned counsel for the applicant 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 has read over the statements of the witnesses before me. He submits that no specific role has been assigned to the applicant, therefore, he may be enlarged on anticipatory bail. On the other hand, learned Additional Advocate General assisted by learned counsel for the complainant opposed the bail application. Without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case while taking into consideration the overall facts and circumstances of the present case, I do not find it to be a fit case to extend benefit of anticipatory bail to the applicant. Accordingly, the bail application moved by the applicant under Section 438 Cr.P.C. is rejected. (SATYA PRAKASH PATHAK), J.