SAYED SULTAN AHMAD Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a second bail application of the petitioner, Sayed Sultan Ahmed. The first application was dismissed on 29.8.92. In this second bail application it was ordered on 5.2.93 that the witnesses, namely Fakar Ali Ahmed and Ali Ahmed should be examined first and the matter will be considered after the statement is recorded. Both these witnesses have been examined. They can be said to be the main witnesses in the case. The learned counsel for the petitioner has pointed out omissions in the FIR and the statements under Sec. 161 Criminal Procedure Code. which have now been stated while these two witnesses were examined in court. According to the learned counsel for the Complainant the police did not investigate the case in a fair manner and insisted on the Complainant that the case should be compromised and proper investigation was done only when investigation was handed over to the C.I.D.

(2.) The learned counsel for the petitioner has pointed out certain statements of witnesses recorded during police investigations who have not been cited as witnesses in the cases pending again. Some other accused in this very FIR, some of those witnesses have been examined as court witnesses and statement of Sugra begum may be said to be in that category. At this stage I would not like to express any opinion on the merits of the case as trial is still pending and several witnesses remained to be examined. It may be stated that one of the reasons on account of which the earlier bail application was refused that the petitioner had been absconding for about a year and now he has remained in custody for about eleven months.

(3.) Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, it is considered proper to allow bail to the petitioner on certain conditions.