IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. CR.MISC.BAIL APPLICATION NO.6558/2010 Bhagirath @ Bhagi Vs. State of Rajasthan Date of order : 15/07/2010. HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAMMAD RAFIQ Mr. Harender Singh Sinsinwar for accused petitioners Mr. Amit Poonia Public Prosecutor for the State ****** Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Public Prosecutor for the State and perused the relevant documents placed before me. The contention of the learned counsel for the accused petitioner is that the learned Court below while rejecting his bail applications has incorrectly observed that in all 14 cases were registered against the present accused petitioner and co-accused. The petitioner is made accused in number of FIRs registered at Police stations Data Ramgarh, Khatu Shyamji and Losal of Sikar District and Police Station Rainwal of Jaipur District. In all cases, the allegation against the petitioner is that he committed theft of buffaloes and goats. In fact, in one of the FIRs, the allegation against the petitioner is that he attempted to commit theft and when complainant awoke, he ran away. It is contended with vehemence that in FIR No.48/2010 of Police Station Khatu Shyamji and in FIR No. 73/2010 of Police Station Data Ramgarh the accused petitioner has falsely been implicated with the offence under Sections 307 and 353 IPC, inasmuch as no injury whatsoever has been received by any member of the police party and that these cases have been registered against the petitioner only with a view to deprive him of his liberty to get the bail. It is further contended that having arrested the accused petitioner in one case, all other cases of similar nature have been registered against him. Except these cases of theft registered against the accused petitioner one after another, there is no case pending against them in any of the Police Stations of the State. Lastly, the learned counsel contended that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in series of cases of similar nature solely with a view to depicting him as habitual offender. On the other hand, learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the bail applications. However, he was not in a position to point out whether any case was ever registered against the petitioner at earlier point of time at any Police Station of the State, for any offence whatsoever, nor could he point out any injury so as to justify the implication of the accused petitioners under Section 307 IPC. Considering the rival submissions and without expressing any opinion on the merits of this case but taking into consideration all the facts and circumstances of the case, particularly the facts that (i) the accused petitioner is behind the bars for almost three months and (ii) challan has been presented and trial of the cases is likely to take considerable time, I deem it just and appropriate to enlarge the petitioner on bail during trial. Resultantly, this bail application u/S. 439 Cr.P.C. is allowed and it is directed that petitioner Bhagirath @ Bhagi S/O Shri Prabhuram shall be released on bail in F.I.R 57/2010 of P.S. Rainwal district Jaipur on his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.30,000/- together with two sureties in the sum of Rs.15,000/- each to the satisfaction of the trial Court for his appearance before that court on all dates of hearing and as and when called upon to do so till conclusion of the trial. It is made clear that if the accused petitioner is found to be indulged in commission of any offence, that itself will be a ground for the Prosecution to apply for cancellation of his bail. (MOHAMMAD RAFIQ), J. Thanvi