R. S. VERMA, J.

( 1 ) THIS case raises a piquant situation. Six persons are being tried in the court of learned Sessions Judge, Sirohi for offences u/ss. 147, 148, 302, 149 I. P. C. Accused petitioner Arjun Singh, Khet Singh and Man Singh filed S. B. Cr. Misc Bail Pet. No. 1199192 before this Court. The petitioners were represented by Shri B. S. Rathore and Shri B. S. Bhati, P. P. appeared on behalf of the State. Shri Surendra Surana appeared on behalf of the complainant. This application was heard by Honble Y. R. Meena, Vacation Judge. The application was not pressed and was dismissed on 26. 6. 1992 with liberty to file a fresh application for bail after three months.

( 2 ) ARJUN Singh, Khet Singh and Man Singh moved a second application for bail being S. B. Cr. Misc. Second Bail Application No. 1978/92. The petitioners were represented by Shri Pradeep Shah, Advocate. Shri Deeraj Bohra, P. P.- appeared on behalf of the State and Shri Surendra Surana appeared for the complainant. The matter was heard by Honble Mr. Y. R. Meena, J, who granted the application for bail of Arjun Singh but rejected the application for bail of Khet Singh and Man Singh at that stage. Liberty was granted to file another application for bail after examination of doctor and eye -witnesses.

( 3 ) PETITIONER Man Singh and Khet Singh filed another application being S. B. Cr. Misc. 111rd application No. 580/93. This application was heard by Hon ble R. P. Saxena, J and Shri Pradeep Shah appeared on behalf of the petitioners and Shri C. R. Jakhar, P. P. appeared on behalf of the State and Shri Surendra Surana appeared for the complainant. This application was dismissed by Honble R. P. Saxena, J on merits. A parole application being S. B. Cr. Misc. Bail (Parole) Application No. 1614/93 was moved on behalf of Man Singh on the ground of ailment of his mother Smt. Antar Kanwar. After considering the report of the Medical Board, this application was dismissed by me on 27. 10. 1993. Shri Suresh Kumbhat appeared for the petitioner, while Shri Lalit Kawadia P. P. appeared on behalf of the State and Shri Surendra Surana appeared on behalf of the complainant in the case. S. B. Cr. V. Misc. Bail Pet. No. 2087/93 was filed by Man Singh and this application came before me on 18. 11. 1993. Shri N. N. Mathur appeared for the petitioner. Shri Lalit Kawadia appeared on behalf of the State, while Shri Surendra Surana appeared on behalf of the complainant. It was brought to notice that two prosecution witnesses remained to be examined and 6th December, 1993 has been fixed for their evidence. In the said situation, the application for bail was rejected by me and the prosecution was directed to ensure that its witnesses are examined on 6. 12. 1993. A further direction was given that in case prosecution fails to do so, the petitioner shall be free to move a fresh application for bail before the learned trial court and in case need be, before this Court as well. Now, this application for bail has been filed by Man Singh.

( 4 ) A brief reference to two other applications for bail filed on behalf of accused Devi Singh and Ram Singh may be made here. Accused Devi Singh moved S. B. Cr. Misc. Bail No. 1871/93. This application came before me on 11. 10. 1993 and Shri Suresh Kumbhat appeared on behalf of the petitioner and Shri K. L. Thakur P. P. , appeared on behalf of the State. Counsel for the complainant did not appear in this case. After hearing both the sides, I granted this application for bail vide order dated 11. 10. 1993. Another application being S. B. Cr. Misc. Bill No. 1955/93 was filed by Ram Singh. This application came before me on 25. 10. 1993 and in this case Shri Suresh Kumbhat appeared on behalf of the petitioner. Shri K. L. Thakur, P. P. appeared on behalf of the State. Nobody appeared on behalf of complainant. In the facts and circumstances of the case, the application for bail was accepted by me on 27. 10. 1993. It may be re - called that when I passed or