P.D. Kudal, J.
1. This is an application for bail under Section 428 Cr. P.C.
2. A case under Section 452, 307, 147 and 148 IPC was registered on 17-10-1974 against the accused applicant along with five others The prosecution case is that elections were held in the Dayanand College, Ajmer in those days and that there was tension between the two contesting candidates. The accused applicant along wish others was siding Purshottam while the com plainant party was canvasing for the other candidate. It is alleged that on the night intervening 16th and 17th October 1974, the applicant along with others went to the room of Gurdayal Singh and assaulted him when he was sleeping in the room His cousin Ram Niwas was also sleeping and was assaulted. It is alleged that Gurdayal Singh and Ram Niwas sustained injuries. An application for grant of anticipatory bail was also moved before the Learned Sessions Judge which was rejected on February 12, 1975.
3. It has been contended on behalf of the accused applicant that the investigating agency is being exploited and that there is every reason of the abuse of the process. It was also contended that the accused applicant has been falsely implicated. It was also contended that the other accused persons have been released on bail or an order for anticipatory bail have been passed. The attention of the court was also invited to the affidavit of Gurdayal Singh dated 17-6-76 whereby he has totally denied the prosecution version. Attention was also invited to the affidavit of Gurdayal Singh dated 26-2-76 wherein Gurdayal Singh had also previously not supported the prosecution story. The accused applicant has submitted the copies of the statements under sector 161 Cr. P. C. and the injury, report by the M.O.
4. The learned Public Prosecutor was directed to produce the case diary. The learned Public Prosecutor stated that despite three reminders the case diary has not been received by him.
5. It was further contended that the accused applicant is a young boy of about 20 years, and that he is a student of the Dayanand College, and that his entire educational career his been smashed because of this criminal case. It was also contended that no articles have to be recovered and that there is no reason for not admitting the accused to bail and that the incident has taken place as back as on 17-10-74.
6. The learned Public Prosecutor has expressed his inability reproduce she case diary as the case diary was not received despite reminders. Looking to the facts and circumstances of the case he did not seriously oppose the grant of anticipatory bail to the accused applicant, and in my opinion rightly so.
7. Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case sad looking to the fact that the accused applicant is a student who is prosecuting studies and that the incident took place as early as on 17-10-74, and that no articles have to be recovered from bin and that she Learned Public Prosecutor does not seriously challenge the grant of bail to him, it appears expedient and necessary in the interests of justice, that the accused applicant be released on bail whenever arrested by the police in this case on his executing a personal bond of Rs. 5000/- with a surety of the like amount. Provided further that the accused applicant shall present himself before the Police authorities when ever required for interrogation and investigation. He shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence and that he shall not go out of the State of Rajasthan without prior permission of the Learned Sessions Judge, Ajmer. I the accused applicant is found to have committed breach of any of these conditions the police authorities would be free to move an application for cancellation of this bail order before the Learned Sessions Judge, Ajmer, who shall decide such application on merit.