R. S. GARG, J. ( 1 ) HEARD. Case diary of crime No. 20/2000 of P. S. Narsinghpur for offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 307, 302, 449, 324, 323 read with Section 149 IPC and 25/27 of Arms Act, perused. ( 2 ) CASE diary of crime No. 21/ 2000 registered at Police Station Narsinghpur for offences punishable under Sections 323, 324, 294 all read with Section 34 IPC also perused. ( 3 ) CRIME No. 21/2000 has been registered on report of Khirsingh Sheru who is an applicant before this Court, while crime No. 20/2000 was registered on report of Dharmendra Sb Ramendra Singh. ( 4 ) UNDISPUTEDLY, in the incident dated 16-1-2000 Ramendra Singh lost his life while Dharmendra Singh had suffered as many as five injuries out of which one is a fracture of the parietal bone. It is also, not in dispute that applicants Girish, Khirsingh Sheru, Deepak and Dhannu Vijay have suffered number of injuries. Girish has suffered incised wound and contusions. Applicant Khirsingh has suffered lacerated wounds on forehead and left ear and has also suffered contusion. Applicant Deepak has suffered incised wound, lacerated wound, abrasions and contusions. Applicant Dhannu Vijay, has suffered incised wound, lacerated wound and abrasions. ( 5 ) THE prosecution case in brief is that the present applicants came to the shop of Ramendra to chastise him. as Ramendrasingh abused Meena bai W/0 applicant Khirshingh Sheru. According to the prosecution, all the applicants armed with deadly weapons, entered in the shop of Ramendrasingh, brought him out and made assault on him. When Dharmendra and Vinod came to be intervene they were also beaten. Said Ramendra Singh suffered two lacerated wounds on his head region and suffered two stab wounds on and near the inter costal region. Though in the first information report it is alleged that Vijay Deepak. Vinod and Girish came to the spot and were armed with lathi and farsha but later on the witnesses started asserting that Girish was armed with a pointed rod. ( 6 ) THE defence of the applicants is that Sheru Khirsingh had gone to lodge a complaint to Ramendra on which Ramendra and the others opened an assault on Shersingh. To save Shersingh and intervene in the matter when the other four came they were also assaulted by Ramendra, Dharmendra and Banti. ( 6 ) THE defence of the applicants is that Sheru Khirsingh had gone to lodge a complaint to Ramendra on which Ramendra and the others opened an assault on Shersingh. To save Shersingh and intervene in the matter when the other four came they were also assaulted by Ramendra, Dharmendra and Banti. In the first information report lodged by the Khirsingh he has clearly stated that in defence he and the others also caused injuries to the wrong doers. In the report lodged by Dharmendra there is no mention that they had caused injuries to the applicants either in their defence or to avert the attack. ( 7 ) TALKING into consideration the totality of the circumstances. I do not consider case of Girish to be fit for grant of bail. His application is rejected. ( 8 ) APPLICATION of applicants No. 2 to 5 (Sheru Shersingh Khirsingh. Dhannu Vijay. Deepak and Vinod) is allowed. ( 9 ) ON applicants. No. 2 to 5 furnishing a personal bond each in sum of Rs. 15. 000/- with one surety each in the like amount to the satisfaction of C. J. M. Narsinghpur, they shall immediately be released on bail for their appearance before the said Court/trial court/committal court and/or as and where so directed. C. C. must be supplied today itself. Application allowed partly. .