1 S.B.CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION NO.3309/06 Date : 03.08. 2006 HON'BLE MR. SATYA PRAKASH PATHAK, J. Mr. J.S. Choudhary for the applicant. Mr. V.R. Mehta, Public Prosecutor for State. I have heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as the learned Public Prosecutor for the State and carefully gone through the impugned order. The contention of learned counsel for the applicant is that in the instant case in relation to incident dated 14.11.2005, First Information Report has been lodged on 15.07.2006. According to learned counsel, delay in lodging the FIR itself sufficient to prove that in relation to the incident correct version has not been placed, therefore, the applicant should be enlarged on bail. On the other hand, learned Public Prosecutor submitted that day when this incident had taken place both the parties were bound down under Section 107 Cr.P.C., therefore, 2 the accused-applicant is not entitled to be enlarged on bail. I have considered the submissions made before me and carefully gone through the material available on record. It is suffice to say that in relation to such an old incident even if proceedings under Section 107 Cr.P.C. were drawn, then, also lodging the FIR after an inordinate delay in my opinion, entitles the applicant to seek benefit of anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. Taking into consideration the overall facts and circumstances of the present case, I deem it just and proper to grant anticipatory bail to the applicant. Accordingly, it is directed that in the event of arrest of applicant Badri Lal son of Dhool Chand by I.O./S.H.O. in CR No.29/2006 P.S. Mahila Thana, Bhilwara, he shall be released on bail provided he furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.30,000/- alongwith two sound and solvent sureties in the sum of Rs.15,000/- each to the satisfaction of Investigating Officer on the following conditions:- 3 (i)That he shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required; (ii)That he shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer and; (iii)That he shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court. (SATYA PRAKASH PATHAK), J. vijayant