S.B.CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION NO.5253/2006 Date : 22.11.2006 HON'BLE MR. SATYA PRAKASH PATHAK, J. Mr. M.A. Siddiqui for the applicant. Mr. V.R. Mehta, Public Prosecutor for State. By the instant bail application the applicant has sought interim bail for the reason that his wife is required to take treatment and if necessary Hysterectomy may also take place. The contention of learned counsel is that the applicant is only person to look after the family members and his old parents and his wife also requires attention. On the other hand, learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the application for interim bail. I have considered the submissions made before me. After hearing learned counsel for the parties while taking into consideration the overall facts and circumstances of the present case and looking to the quantity of the contraband material i.e.250 Kgs. involved in the case, I do not feel inclined to extend benefit of interim bail to the applicant. Accordingly, the application for interim bail moved by the applicant under Section 439 Cr.P.C. stands rejected. (SATYA PRAKASH PATHAK), J. vij