IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR BENCH JAIPUR ORDER S.B. Criminal Misc. 2nd Bail Application No. 7259/2009 Kalu @ Sonu vs. State of Rajasthan Dated : 05.10.2009 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MAHESH BHAGWATI Mr. Sunieel Bhatiya, for the petitioner. Mr. Amit Punia, Public Prosecutor for the State. Mr. Sanjay Gangwar, for the complainant. This order governs the disposal of second bail application filed under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. by Shri Sunieel Bhatiya Advocate on behalf of the applicant Kalu @ Sonu pertaining to F.I.R. No. 61/2008 at police station Clock Tower, Ajmer, in the offence under Section 307 of IPC. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Public Prosecutor appearing for the State and perused the material on record. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that the the petitioner has been in custody for the last 17 months and almost all the prosecution witnesses except the Investigating Officer have been examined by the trial court. Investigating Officer Chandra Singh Rawat has been absconding in one Anti Corruption Case, hence, there does not appear to be any possibility of recording his statement in near future. In view of these facts and circumstances, the petitioner may be granted indulgence of bail. 4. Learned counsel for the complainant as also learned Public Prosecutor have opposed the bail application for the name's sake. Learned counsel for the complainant submits that both the parties have compromised. 5. Having considered the submissions made at the bar and scanned the relevant material on record including the bail order dated 27th August, 2009 rendered by the learned trial court and injury report of the injured Kamal, it is noticed that the petitioner caused five injuries on the person of the injured Kamal, out of which one is stab wound, two are incised wounds, one is lacerated wound and the fifth is abrasion on the front of chest. It is further noticed that the petitioner is found to have stabbed a knife on the front of chest of injured Kamal. The petitioner used a deadly sharp edged weapon knife and endeavoured to commit his murder. The trial of the case is at the last stage, only two witnesses Chandra Singh Rawat and Mahendra Nath are left to be examined by the prosecution. Out of these two witnesses Mahendra Nath happens to an eye witness. Keeping in view all the facts and circumstances as also the nature of the weapon used by the petitioner, I, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, do not feel inclined to grant any indulgence of bail to the petitioner and the second bail petition also deserves to be dismissed. 6. In the result, the second bail petition filed under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. on behalf of the accused-petitioner stands dismissed. 7. However, learned trial court is directed to record the statements of these two witnesses Chandra Singh Rawat and Mahendra Nath within a period of one month and decide the case as early as possible, as the petitioner has been in custody for the last 17 months. (MAHESH BHAGWATI),J. Mak/- 26