MAHAVEER @ AJAY KUMAR Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the parties.

(2.) It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that petitioner is behind the bars since September, 2005. The contention of learned counsel for the petitioner is that although the case under Sections 307, 326, 324 and 323 I.P.C. was registered against him at Sriganganagar, but later on, when charges were framed by the District Judge, petitioner was discharged for offence under Section 326 I.P.C., but charge of Sections 307, 324 and 323 I.P.C. was framed against the petitioner and he is behind the bars and after framing charges, trial has not commenced so far.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that while rejecting the earlier bail application of the petitioner, it was observed in the order that petitioner is behind the bars for more than two years and nine months. Therefore, in the interest of justice, the learned trial court was directed to record the statement of the complainant first and after recording statement of complainant, the petitioner will be free to file fresh bail application.