In the High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan At Jaipur Bench, Jaipur O R D E R In S.B. Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.7024/06 Rambilas Vs. State of Rajasthan Date Of Order :: 15th November, 2006 Hon'ble Mr. Justice Jitendra Ray Goyal Mr. Biri Singh, counsel for petitioner Mr. R.P. Kuldeep, Public Prosecutor for State. .................... Heard learned counsel for accused petitioner, learned Public Prosecutor for the State, perused the case diary and other material produced during the course of arguments. Learned counsel for accused petitioner contended that the accused petitioner has falsely been implicated in this matter. It is also contended which has not been controverted by the learned Public Prosecutor that the head injury to Fareed has not been ascribed to the present accused petitioner Rambilas but to other co-accused Kailash and Rajendra. Learned Public Prosecutor opposed the bail application. Without making any observation on merits, having considered the rival submissions made at the bar, nature of accusation, material on record, all other facts and circumstances and the fact that it is not alleged that the accused petitioner Rambilas caused the head injury to Fareed and only general allegations have been levelled against the accused petitioner, I deem it proper to grant the benefit of pre-arrest bail to accused petitioner Rambilas. In the result, the bail application is allowed and it is directed that in the event of arrest of petitioner Rambilas S/o. Dev Lal, he shall be released on bail by the concerned SHO/Investigating Officer in FIR No.138/2006 registered at Police Station Jawar, District Jhalawar provided he furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.10,000/- together with two sureties each in the sum of Rs.5,000/- to his satisfaction on the following conditions :- 1. that the petitioner shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required; 2. that the petitioner 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 them from disclosing such facts to the Court or any police officer; and 3. that the petitioner shall not leave India without previous permission of the Court. (J.R. Goyal),J VS Shekhawat/- Jr. P.A.