MOTI RAM & ORS. Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) All these petition may be disposed of by a common order.

(2.) The matter has been argued at length by the learned counsel for the petitioners, learned counsel for the complainant and the learned Public Prosecutor. The statements of the witnesses recorded under Sec. 161 Crimial P.C. were also read over to me.

(3.) Mr. Gupta, appearing for petitioners Bhagirath and Pokharmal contended that the case of petitioner Pokharmal is at par with that of co-accused Hanuman, who has been released on bail. According to the learned counsel, the name of this accused did not find place in the FIR like co-accused Hanuman. For petitioner Bhagirath, it was contended that as per the arrest memo, he is an old man of 2 years of age and looking to the cause of incident that deceased had entered in the house of the accused and thereafter he was caught and assaulted, just and proper that he should also be released on bail.