1 10 S.B.CRIMINAL MISC. THIRD BAIL APPLICATION NO.6600/2009 Hanumana Ram Vs. The State of Rajasthan DATE OF ORDER : 4th February 2010 HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE DINESH MAHESHWARI Mr.R.K.Bishnoi,for the petitioner. Mr.O.P.Singaria, Public Prosecutor for State. .... BY THE COURT Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor and examined the record. Though the learned counsel for the petitioner has strenuously argued with reference to the statements of the complainant Rajesh Kumar (PW-1) that so far the petitioner is concerned, there is no likelihood of his being convicted in the matter and rather the case of false implication is apparent, but looking to the totality of the circumstances, the nature of accusations and the antecedents of the petitioner, said to be involved previously in four criminal cases, this Court does not feel inclined to grant indulgence to the petitioner. However, it is noticed that while rejecting the second bail application on 04.08.2009, this Court observed that if the petitioners make a request before the learned Trial Court for expeditious trial, the same be given due consideration particularly keeping in view the fact that this Court has 2 declined the bail plea of the petitioners with reference to their involvement in other cases. Having regard to the circumstances, it would definitely be expected of the learned Trial Court to proceed expeditiously with the trial curbing against unnecessary delay. With the observations aforesaid, this third bail application moved on behalf of the petitioner Hanumana Ram s/o Loona Ram under Section 439 Cr.P.C.stands rejected. (DINESH MAHESHWARI),J. s.soni