ORDER : ANANT S. DAVE, J. 1. Rule. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor waives service of rule on behalf of respondent-State and Mr. Ashish Dagli, learned advocate waives service of rule on behalf of respondent No. 2. 2. At this stage, this application is not pressed for applicant No. 1 Virjibhai Madhabhai Rojasra, original accused No. 1 and applicant No. 5 Virambhai Panchabhai Rojasra, original accused No. 9. However, liberty is reserved to move application for bail at appropriate stage, if appeal is not heard finally within a year. Rule discharged qua applicant Nos. 1 and 5. 3. In this application seeking bail for rest of the accused i.e applicant Nos. 2, 3 and 4, it is submitted that hardly there is any evidence about their causing any injury on injured but convicted with an aid of Sections 143, 147, 148, 149 etc. It is submitted that conviction for the offence under Section 307 and sentencing these applicants for 7 years, for which, they have remained in jail for 1½ year, by imposing suitable conditions their case can be considered for bail. 4. Against the above, Mr. Rutviz Oza, learned APP for the respondent-State and Mr. Ashish Dagli, learned advocate for the original injured witness/complainant submits that against sentence of 7 years upon conviction under Section 307, appeal is filed for enhancement of sentence and particularly all the accused have played active role in inflicting injuries, for which, now they stand convicted and releasing them on bail only because they have remained in jail for 1½ year is no ground to exercise the power as prayed for. Learned advocates have drawn attention of this Court on nature of injuries and role of each of the accused so discussed and stood proved before the trial Court. 5. Having regard to the facts and circumstances, without deliberating any detail on the nature of evidence so appreciated and analyzed by the trial court at this stage, we find that applicant Nos. 2, 3 and 4 i.e original accused No. 3, 6 and 8 can be considered for bail by imposing suitable conditions. 6. The present application is allowed qua applicant Nos. 2, 3 and 4 i.e original accused No. 3, 6 and 8. The applicant Nos. 2, 3 and 4 i.e original accused No. 3, 6 and 8 are enlarged on bail on their furnishing a solvent surety of Rs. 6. The present application is allowed qua applicant Nos. 2, 3 and 4 i.e original accused No. 3, 6 and 8. The applicant Nos. 2, 3 and 4 i.e original accused No. 3, 6 and 8 are enlarged on bail on their furnishing a solvent surety of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten thousand) each and personal bond of the like amount on usual terms and on the following further conditions:— 1. The applicant Nos. 2, 3 and 4 i.e original accused No. 3, 6 and 8 shall not take undue advantage of their liberty or abuse their liberty. 2. The applicant Nos. 2, 3 and 4 i.e original accused No. 3, 6 and 8 shall not to try to tamper with the evidence or pressurize the prosecution witnesses or complainant in any manner. 3. maintain law and order. 4. surrender their passport, if any, to the lower Court, within a week. 5. they shall remain out of District: Surrendranagar for a period of one year except their presence required in trial. 6. shall mark their presence twice in a month before the concerned police station. 7. In the meanwhile, the substantive sentence shall remain under suspension. Bail bond before the Trial Court. Rule is made absolute qua applicant Nos. 2, 3 and 4 i.e original accused No. 3, 6 and 8. Direct service is permitted. 8. Learned APP may convey this order to the jail authority forthwith.