Since only lalkara was attributed to respondent No, 1 therefore, the learned Sessions Judge granted bail to him. At this stage it cannot be said that actually he made lalkara or not. In view of the number of the injuries, there was no chance for the prosecution to attribute any injury to the respondent. If there had been many injuries and still lalkara had been attributed it could be said that what bad happened at the time of occurrence, it was stated in the F. I. R. Without making any addition or substraction. The possibility cannot be excluded at this stage that simply to involve the respondent the lalkara may have been attributed to him. The respondent denies the allegation and has filed counter affidavit stating that he never threatened any witness He has given assurance that he did not threaten the witnesses nor he intends to do so.
2. In the circumstances of the case, I do not find any force in the application for cancellation of the bail and reject the same.