' It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that petitioner is not named in the F.I.R., that he has been falsely implicated in this case, that recovery has been supplied by the complainant party, that he is not attributed any injury and that his case is of further inquiry falling under sub- clause (2) of section 497, Cr.P.C.
2. Learned State Counsel submits that recovery has been affected from the petitioner, that he is one of the accused, who along with three others committed the murder of the deceased, that challan has been submitted, charge has been framed and evidence has been summoned.
3. I have heard learned counsel for the parties. Though the petitioner is not named in the F.I.R. But he is named in the statement made by the complainant on the next day of the occurrence and all the three eye-witnesses. The other eye-witness, namely Ghulam Rasool has also named the petitioner, recovery has also been effected from him, he is already involved in three other cases, two of theft and one of causing hurt, he has been found guilty by the police, challan has been submitted, charge has been framed, evidence has been summoned, no case for bail is made out; therefore, this petition is dismissed.