1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN JAIPUR BENCH, JAIPUR ORDER SB Cr Misc Third Bail Application No. 8671/2009 Rajaram Vs State of Rajasthan through PP 22.10.2010 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MN BHANDARI Mr NC Chaudhary - for the petitioner Mr Peeyush Kumar, PP – for the State BY THE COURT: It is stated that one eye-witness has already been examined who has not made allegations against petitioner. Other eye-witnesses are not deposing their statements through they were called many times thus it is only with a view to delay hearing of the bail application that second eye-witness is not coming before the court. It has been prayed that petitioner may be granted bail. Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the bail application. I have considered submissions made by learned counsel for parties. On perusal of the second bail application it is revealed that second bail application was dismissed with liberty to file a fresh bail application after recording of statement of eye- witnesses. The trial court was directed to record the statements of eye-witnesses on priority basis. If statements of eye-witnesses have not been recorded on priority basis then it is a lapse on the part of the trial court. 2 After considering rival submissions of the parties and without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, which may otherwise affect outcome of the trial, looking to the facts of this case, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. Hence, third bail application is dismissed. The learned trial court is directed to record statements of eye-witnesses on priority basis and, in case of failure of eye-witnesses to appear before the trial court for statements, appropriate measures may be taken for ensuring their presence or to pass appropriate orders. Petitioner would be at liberty to file a fresh bail application immediately on recording of statements of eye-witnesses. (MN BHANDARI), J. bnsharma