JUDGMENT 1. - The offences, alleged to have been committed by the petitioner are under sections 302 and 379 IPC. The incident occurred on 28th September, 1988. The deceased was taken by the petitioner to his house in village Baroli and there they took liquor together. Thereafter, some dispute arose and it is alleged that Jogendra Singh was beaten by the petitioner by fists and some money and other articles etc. were taken away from him. Jogendra Singh was taken to several hospitals but he died after 13 days of this incident. The cause of death according to the post mortem report, is the injuries to testicles and kidneys, extra-vesation of urine and suppuration. Spleen was also enlarged. It is also stated that the liver and the spleen were not healthy and were in damaged condition, due to the excessive consumption of Alcohol. The deceased has also been referred as choronic alcoholic for the last 20 years. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that the petitioner as well as the deceased were taking liquor together and it could be that some quarrel took place but looking to the nature of the injuries caused by the petitioner there could be no intention of causing death of Jogendra Singh. It is also contended that the report was lodged after a long delay of 14 days and the petitioner has been implicated falsely. As regards the medical aspect, it is contended that the death was not the result of the injuries inflicted by the petitioner but due to the failure of the organs, which were already in bad condition. 3. The learned Public Prosecutor has contended that there are two eye witnesses of the incident and deceased had also made statement to his wife and others about the beating given to him by the petitioner. It is also contended that the deceased had illicit relations with the wife of the petitioner and because of this the petitioner had a motive to quarrel with the deceased. For the medical aspect it is stated that this can be appreciated after the Sessions Judge examines the same after examination of the doctors. 4. I have considered the contentions raised on behalf of both the sides. For the medical aspect it is stated that this can be appreciated after the Sessions Judge examines the same after examination of the doctors. 4. I have considered the contentions raised on behalf of both the sides. It can be said at this stage that no opinion can be expressed on the merits of the case, however, from the facts and circumstances of the case, it can be said that first the petitioner and the deceased were both taking liquor together then something happened and the deceased was beaten. How and why this quarrel started has not been brought out, though the deceased remained alive and conscious after the incident for a long time. The details do not appear to have been furnished by him. From the external injuries and the nature of the abrasions on the renal region and on the head at present it cannot be said that these down ward blows could have deteriorated the kidneys and spleen to the extent they were found by the doctors. There may be or may not be a direct connection between the injuries and cause of death. The petitioner has remained in custody for about four months and considering the circumstances, he can be released on bail on appropriate conditions. 5. It is therefore, ordered that the accused petitioner Mukhtiyar Singh be released on bail provided he furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) with two surety in the sum of Rs. 5,000/- each to the satisfaction of the trial court with the stipulation to appear before that court on all dates of hearing during the pendency of trial against him in this case. With the further conditions: (a) That he shall not threaten the prosecution witnesses either by himself or through any one else; and (b) That he shall not consume any Alcohol. Application allowed. *******