HIRAU Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Shri Kochar learned Counsel for the appellants after taking us through the statements of PW 2, PW 3 and PW 18 submits that as the witnesses have turned hostile and have not supported the prosecution on material-aspects and the details regarding involvement of these appellants in commission of the said crime, each of the appellants deserves to be released on bail. On the other hand learned Counsel appearing for the State submits that as these three witnesses have named the present appellants, therefore, they do not deserve to be released on bail.

(2.) From the statements Of PW 2, PW 3 and PW 18 it appears that relating to the first incident of chastisement they were making allegations against the appellants but relating to main incident of marpeet they were totally silent. It is also to be seen that PW 3 is the daughter of the deceased who in her turn has not supported the prosecution allegations. Application is allowed.

(3.) The applicants are directed to be released on bail on each of them furnishing personal bond of Rs. 10,000/ - with one surety of like amount to the satisfaction of the Trial Court. They shall appear before the registry of this Court on 24-7-2001 and thereafter, before the Trial Court as and when directed in this behalf by that Court. Application allowed.