PRAHLAD Vs. STATE OF RAJ.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is the second bail application moved by the applicant seeking his release on bail under Section 439 Code of Criminal Procedure in connection with the FIR No. 16/2009 registered at P.S. Dantaramgarh, District Sikar.

(2.) IT has been submitted by the learned advocate Mr. G.S. Shekhawat for the applicant that the first bail application was rejected by the court for want of prosecution and also on merits, however, he was not heard on merits. He further submitted that from the evidence of witnesses examined before the trial court, the role of the applicant is not clearly spelt out. According to Mr. Shekhawat, the other two accused Datar Singh and Bhanwar Lal have already been released on bail by this Court and hence the present application is required to be allowed on the ground of parity.

(3.) HAVING regard to the submissions made by the learned Counsels for the parties and the documents on record, it transpires that applicant had earlier filed SB Cr. Misc. Bail Application No. 5465/11 which was dismissed on 15.7.2011, for want of prosecution and also considering the submissions made by the learned Public Prosecutor alongwith the learned advocate for the complainant. It is a matter of record that the trial of Sessions Case No. 33/09 arising out of the above -mentioned FIR has already begun and the prosecution has already examined more than 10 witnesses. Since the case of prosecution is based on circumstantial evidence, it would not be appropriate at this juncture to appreciate the evidence of witnesses examined by the prosecution so as to come to any prima facie conclusion about the involvement of the present applicant in the alleged incident. It is also required to be noted that the applications of the co -accused Smt. Rupa Devi and Mahaveer have already been dismissed by the court.