JUDGMENT Anil Verma, J. - This is the first bail application under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 filed on behalf of the applicant for grant of bail. The applicant is in custody since 10.11.2022 in connection with Crime No.538/2022 registered at Police Station Manpur, District Indore (M.P.) for commission of offence punishable under sections 307, 323, 324, 294, 506, 326 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code of 1860 read with Section 25 of Arms Act. 2. As per prosecution story, on 07.11.2022 at about 06:30 PM, informant Jitendra lodged an FIR by stating that he alongwith his brother Govind went to milk Dairy of co-accused Arun and Sandeep. On the previous dispute, both have abused to Govind, at that time, other co-accused Sachin has gave sword blow on his left leg, Devendra has inflicted knife injury on his head, Arun has caused injury by means of sword on his left hand and Sandeep has inflicted lathi blow on his back and hand. They have caused multiple injuries to Govind. Accordingly, offence has been registered. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is an innocent person and he has been falsely implicated in this offence. He is in custody since 10.11.2022. Investigation is over and charge-sheet has been filed. Co-accused Sandeep, Mahipal and Arun have been enlarged on bail by this Court vide order 09.01.2023, 13.01.2023 and 20.01.2023 passed in MCRC Nos. 599/2023, 1967/2023 and 3313/2023 respectively in the similar circumstances. Cross FIR has also been lodged against the complainant party and present applicant has also sustained grievous injuries and he was admitted in the hospital for the period of more than 10 days. Applicant is permanent resident of Indore district. Final conclusion of the trial is likely to take sufficient long time. He prays that present applicant be enlarged on bail. 4. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent / State opposes the bail application and prays for its rejection by submitting that three more cases of similar nature have been registered against the present applicant, but counsel for the applicant submits that present applicant has been acquitted in one of the criminal case. 5. Perused the impugned order of the trial Court as well as the case diary. 5. Perused the impugned order of the trial Court as well as the case diary. After considering all the facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of offence, arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the applicant and also taking note of the fact that co-accused Sandeep, Mahipal and Arun have been enlarged on bail by this Court in the similar circumstances, investigation is over and charge-sheet has been filed, cross case has also been registered against the complainant party, present applicant has also sustained various injuries in the incident and final conclusion of the trial will take sufficient long time. In view of the above, without commenting on the merits of the case, I deem it proper to release the applicant on bail. 6. Therefore, the application is allowed. It is directed that applicant be released on bail on his furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs.75,000/-(Rupees Seventy Five Thousand Only) with one solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court for his appearance before the trial Court, as and when required. He shall abide by all the conditions enumerated under Section 437(3) Cr.P.C. 7. Certified copy as per rules.