(1.) WE have heard the appellant's Pairokar, who has appeared as his lawyers is on strike and the learned AGA for the State and have also perused the material on record.
(2.) THE Pairokar for the appellant points out that the first bail application was rejected on 13.5.2010 and in that order the paper book was directed to be prepared within three months and the hearing of the appeal was expedited. It is pointed out that in spite of the lapse of such a long time, and even after the judgement was reserved after hearing on 21.7.2013 and an order for further hearing was passed on 25.9.2013, but till date the hearing was not concluded and the judgement has not been delivered. Thereafter the second bail application was moved. The appellant is in jail for about five years and more than one month after the order of conviction dated 8.2.2010 and he has undergone about 18 months during trial and thus he has served out about 7 years in jail. The allegations in the FIR were that there was a dispute over flow of water on the common road between the parties. Admittedly, hot words were exchanged between the parties and it is said that the appellant Prahlad Singh fired a shot, which unfortunately hit the informant's niece Ms. Preeti. Initially the FIR was lodged under Section 307 IPC, but after Preeti's death the case was converted to an offence under Section 302 IPC. It was submitted that on these allegations the case would not go beyond Section 304 IPC. The other accused persons have been bailed out, who had assaulted the prosecution side with lathi, pharsa and bhalas as there was no injury by these weapons to any person.
(3.) LEARNED AGA has opposed the prayer for bail and submits that all these points have already been considered in the first bail application.