ASRU AND ORS. Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD learned Counsel for petitioners as well as learned Public Prosecutor for State and perused the relevant documents placed before me.

(2.) CONTENTION of the learned Counsel for petitioners is that petitioners have been named only with a view to falsely implicate them. Otherwise, there is cross -case between the parties. While two persons from the side of the accused Pappu and Jasi have sustained fire -arm injuries, there was only one injured on the side of the complainant Akbar, who also received fire -arm injury and in the FIR specific role that has been assigned to the petitioners is pelting stones at the house of the complainant but no one had sustained injuries due to pelting of stones. Jakar has not been assigned any specific role and only omnibus allegation has been made against him. Two accused namely; Pappu and Jafru, who have been assigned specific role have already been enlarged on bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C. Police has not believed the allegation that the incident took place in the house of the complainant, on the contrary, as per case of the petitioners, accused -party, complainant - party was aggressor as they came to attack accused -party. Police has not found any case under Section 452 IPC against any of the petitioners.

(3.) HAVING regard to the facts aforesaid and considering all other facts and circumstances of the case, I deem it just and proper to enlarge the petitioners on pre -arrest bail.