MOOL CHAND Vs. BULAKI DAS & ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Public Prosecutor and learned counsel for the non-petitioners.

(2.) Learned Public Prosecutor has supported the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner. Learned Counsel for the petitioner has urged that the bail granted to non-petitioners No. 1 and 2 should be cancelled, as the said non-petitioners have not appeared before the Investigating Officer and are not co-operating in the investigation of the case. Learned counsel for non-petitioners No. 1 and 2, on the other hand submits that the said non-petitioners are willing to submit themselves for interrogation.

(3.) Learned counsel for non-petitioners No. 1 and 2 is directed to produce non-petitioner No. 1 Bulakidas and non-petitioner No. 2 Tulsidas before the Investigating Officer (Circle Officer), Bikaner on July 20, 1981 for further interrogation. The said non petitioners shall not leave the town of Bikaner during the week beginning 20th July, 1981 and shall present themselves for interrogation before the Investigating Officer or such other Police Officer and at such time during the week, as they may be directed by the Investigating Officer, non-petitioners No. 1 and 2 shall leave Bikaner after seeking permission of the Investigating Officer. The Investigating Officer should complete the interrogation of these accused-non-petitioners No. 1 and 2 within a week.