S.B.CRIMINAL MISC. II BAIL APPLICATION NO.3275/2007 Date : 18.07.2007 HON'BLE MR. SATYA PRAKASH PATHAK, J. Mr. Ravi Dangi for the applicant. Mr. O.P. Rathi, Public Prosecutor for State. I have heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned Public Prosecutor for the State and carefully gone through the impugned order. The contention of learned counsel for the applicant is that statements of material witnesses have been recorded by the learned trial court, therefore, the case of the accused applicant should be considered for bail. Learned counsel has invited my attention towards the statements of PW1 Arjun, PW7 Jagdish, PW13 Fafi and PW17 Dr. Satish Kumar. He submits that cause of death was not known and evidence of last seen is not reliable. Learned counsel has invited my attention towards the site map to show that it was not possible for the witnesses to see that the deceased was taken in the jeep. On the other hand, learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the bail application. I have considered the submissions made before me and persued the challan papers and the statements recorded by the trial court. In the present case, it appears that other material witnesses are required to be examined by the trial court. 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 feel inclined to extend benefit of bail to the applicant. Accordingly, the bail application moved by the applicant under Section 439 Cr.P.C. stands rejected. (SATYA PRAKASH PATHAK), J. vij