P. K. MISRA, J. ( 1 ) THIS is an application under section 439 (2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. 1973 (hereinafter referred to as the Code) filed by the informant of Jaipur P. S. Case No. 42 of 1996 corresponding to G. R. Case No. 204 of 1996 for cancellation of bail granted to opposite parties 1, 2 and 3 by the Assistant Sessions Judge who was in charge of Additional District and Sessions Judge, Jaipur, vide his order dated 15-3-1996 passed in Criminal Misc. Case No. 112 of 1996. ( 2 ) THE informant is the brother of the injured. It was alleged in the F. I. R. dated 28-2-1996 that while the informants younger brother the injured was traveling on scooter along with one Sk. Anish the accused persons. Namely Naimulla Khan Nasrulla Khan. Enamulla Khan and Ainul Hoda were concealing in the house of Moulvi Abdul Kawi Siddiqi. When the scooter passed near the house the last named accused shouted and the other four accused came out from his room with iron rods. It was further alleged in the F. I. R. that accused Enamulla Khan gave a stroke by rod and the injured fell down from the scooter and tried to run away. Accused Naimulla Khan gave two strokes on his right ear as a result or which the injured fell down and thereafter accused Nasrulla Khan gave two strokes on his face and right eye and Sk. Ainul Hoda gave one stroke as a result of which two teeth had been broken and bleeding injuries were sustained on the right eye, hand etc. ( 3 ) IT appears that opposite parties 1 to 3 after being apprehended moved for bail before the Additional Sessions Judge, Jaipur, after their bail application was rejected by the concerned Magistrate. The said petitioner was placed before the Assistant Sessions Judge, in-charge of Additional District and Sessions Judge and bail was granted mainly on the ground that the injury report though called for by the court vide letter dated 14-3-1996 had not been produced on 15-3- 1996. It was also mentioned that there was overwriting in the F. I. R. by subsequently adding sections 325/324/323, Indian Penal Code. In the said order of bail, it was directed that the accused persons were to report before the I. I. C. . It was also mentioned that there was overwriting in the F. I. R. by subsequently adding sections 325/324/323, Indian Penal Code. In the said order of bail, it was directed that the accused persons were to report before the I. I. C. . Jaipur P. S. on every Sunday till submission of final form. ( 4 ) THE said order of bail has been challenged in this Court by filing a petition on 19-3-1996 mainly on the ground that the Assistant Sessions Judge in-charge of Additional District Sessions Judge should not have granted bail hastily without waiting for the injury report. It is further asserted that after being released on bail, opposite parties 1 to 3 alongwith some other accused persons had threatened the family members of the informant and the injured for which a report dated 16-3-1996 as per Annexure 6 has been submitted before the I. I. C. . Jaipur. ( 5 ) AFTER receipt of notice opposite parties 1 to 3 have entered appearance through their Advocate. A counter affidavit has been filed denying allegations made in the petition for cancellation of bail and it has been submitted that a false F. I. R. has been lodged due to previous enmity. It is also submitted that there is history of previous cases and as such a false case has been filed. ( 6 ) A perusal of the order passed by the Assistant Sessions Judge clearly indicates that he has acted in rather hasty manner by granting bail without waiting for the injury report. The order reveals that he had called for the injury report vide letter dated 14-3-1996 and if the same had not been produced by 15-3-1996, it cannot be said that there was inordinate delay in submission of the in jury report. True it is, the accused persons were in custody since 4-3-1996 and liberty of a person even if accused of having committed a crime is very dear. If in a given case, there is inordinate delay on the part of the prosecution to submit case diary and/or other relevant papers such as injury report etc. , it would be open to a court dealing with the bail matter to enlarge an accused person. However, the court must ensure grant of reasonable time to the prosecution. What would be a reasonable time would obviously depend upon the facts and circumstances of each case. , it would be open to a court dealing with the bail matter to enlarge an accused person. However, the court must ensure grant of reasonable time to the prosecution. What would be a reasonable time would obviously depend upon the facts and circumstances of each case. In the facts and circumstances of this case. I am convinced that non-compliance of the order dated 14-3-1996 directing the prosecution to produce the injury report on 15-3-1996 should not have been considered sufficient ground for enlarging the accused persons on bail at that stage and it would have been proper on the part of the Assistant Sessions Judge to grant at least two to three days more to obtain the injury report. The court below had also observed that there was some over-writing in the F. I. R. and prima facie, it was convinced that the alleged offences under sections 325, 324 and 323. Indian Penal Code had been added. Even assuming that there was any justification for such an observation the court below seems to have overlooked the fact that the F. I. R. had been registered under section 307 Indian Penal Code which was definitely a more serious offence than the allegations under sections 325/324/323 Indian Penal Code which were alleged to have been subsequently added. In such view of the matter without giving reasonable opportunity to the prosecution to produce the injury report the Assistant Sessions Judge seems to have acted rather hastily in granting bail to opposite parties 1 to 3. ( 7 ) IN ordinary course, in view of the aforesaid findings. I would have cancelled the bail granted to opposite parties 1 to 3. I find that the informant has alleged about some subsequent illegal action of opposite parties 1 to 3 for which a report was submitted on 16-3-1996 and the application for cancellation of bail has been filed on 19-3-1996. The petition is being taken up for hearing after about three months and there is no further allegation that in the meantime opposite parties 1 to 3 or any other accused persons have committed any overt act. Opposite parties 1 to 3 have enjoyed their liberty for about three months in the meantime and in the absence of any further allegation, though I am satisfied that the order passed by the Assistant Sessions Judge was not proper. Opposite parties 1 to 3 have enjoyed their liberty for about three months in the meantime and in the absence of any further allegation, though I am satisfied that the order passed by the Assistant Sessions Judge was not proper. I am not inclined to cancel the bail already granted at this stage. It is not known as to whether charge sheet has been submitted. The Assistant Sessions Judge had imposed a condition that opposite parties 1 to 3 were to report before the I. I. C. Jaipur P. S. on every Sunday till submission of final form. Having regard to the background of longstanding enmity between the parties and the subsequent allegation made under Annexure-6, I feel it proper to impose a more stringent condition. I, Therefore, direct that opposite parties 1 to 3 should report before the Inspector-in-Charge. Jaipur Police Station on every alternate day till conclusion of commitment proceeding. It is further directed that any attempt on the part of the accused persons including opposite parties 1 to 3 to harass the family members of the informant and the injured would entail cancellation of bail and it would be open to the informant/prosecution to move for cancellation of bail if opposite parties 1 to 3 violate the directions given in this order or indulge in any unlawful activity. ( 8 ) SUBJECT to the aforesaid observation the application for cancellation of bail is disposed of. A copy of this order may be sent to the Inspector-in-Charge, Jaipur Police Station for information and compliance. Application disposed of. .