1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR O R D E R (1) S.B.CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION NO. 4171/07 (Bhan Singh Vs. State of Rajasthan) (2) S.B.CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION NO. 4172/07 (Chet Ram Vs. State of Rajasthan) (3) S.B.CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION NO. 4195/07 (Vijay Kumar Vs. State of Rajasthan) (4) S.B.CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION NO. 4196/07 (Ghanshyam Saini Vs. State of Rajasthan) (5) S.B.CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION NO. 4218/07 (Vijay Kumar Peswani Vs. State of Rajasthan) (6) S.B.CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION NO. 4252/07 (Lal Nath Vs. State of Rajasthan) (7) S.B.CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION NO. 4254/07 (Surendra Singh Dhaka Vs. State of Rajasthan) (8) S.B.CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION NO. 4282/07 (Tara Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan) (9) S.B.CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION NO. 4323/07 (Kana Ram Vs. State of Rajasthan) (10) S.B.CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION NO. 4324/07 (Prabhu Ram Vs. State of Rajasthan) (11) S.B.CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION NO. 4379/07 (Shri Dharampal Vs. State of Rajasthan) (12) S.B.CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION NO. 4400/07 (Girdhari Lal Gaur Vs. State of Rajasthan) (13) S.B.CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION NO. 4410/07 (Sheesh Ram Ruhela Vs. State of Rajasthan) (14) S.B.CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION NO. 4431/07 (Dwarka Prasad Vs. State of Rajasthan) 2 (15) S.B.CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION NO. 4474/07 (Ajay Kumar Vs. State of Rajasthan) (16) S.B.CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION NO. 4476/07 (Ajay Kumar Vs. State of Rajasthan) (17) S.B.CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION NO. 5000/07 (Daljeet Singh Vs. State of Rajasthan) (18) S.B.CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION NO. 5226/07 (Lal Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan) (19) S.B.CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION NO. 5227/07 (Rajendra Shekhar Vs. State of Rajasthan) (20) S.B.CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION NO. 5228/07 (Lal Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan) (21) S.B.CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION NO. 5229/07 (Lal Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan) (22) S.B.CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION NO. 5230/07 (Rajendra Shekhar Vs. State of Rajasthan) (23) S.B.CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION NO. 5231/07 (Rajendra Shekhar Vs. State of Rajasthan) (24) S.B.CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION NO. 5232/07 (Rajendra Shekhar Vs. State of Rajasthan) (25) S.B.CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION NO. 5233/07 (Rajendra Shekhar Vs. State of Rajasthan) (26) S.B.CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION NO. 5234/07 (Rajendra Shekhar Vs. State of Rajasthan) (27) S.B.CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION NO. 5571/07 (Lal Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan) (28) S.B.CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION NO. 5572/07 (Lal Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan) (29) S.B.CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION NO. 5683/07 (Shri Sonu Vs. State of Rajasthan) DATE OF ORDER : 14/02/2008 3 P R E S E N T HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.R.PANWAR Mr. Vinit Kumar Mathur } Mr. Rakesh Matoria } Mr. Niranjan Singh } Mr. B.S.Rathore } Mr. Pradeep Choudhary } Mr. J.K.Chanda } for the petitioners. Mr. D.L.Rawla } Mr. B.S.Sandhu } Mr. Mahesh Thanvi } Mr. K.L.Thakur, Addl. Advocate Genl for the State along with Mr. Narpat Singh, Deputy Supdt. of Police, I.O. All these bail applications involve common question of law and facts and therefore, with the consent of learned counsel for the parties, are heard and decided together. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Additional Advocate General appearing for the State. Perused the orders impugned and police investigation diary as also the written submission filed by learned Additional Advocate General. The allegation against the petitioners is that they were not the resident of District Sri Ganganagar but belonging to some other districts and from other districts they had a licence of Muzzle loading gun said to have been issued by the concerned Tehsildar, on the basis of which, by concealing their permanent address, showing the address of district Sri Ganganagar, applied 4 for the conversion of bore on their licence before the Additional District Magistrate, Sri Ganganagar and the Additional District Magistrate, Sri Ganganagar converted the bore under the provisions of Arms Act by converting the bore to Revolver, pistol etc. On the basis of such licence after having been converted, the petitioners purchased the arms and therefore, they have committed the offence punishable under the Arms Act as also forgoing of the document i.e. by concealing their correct address. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that on the FIR being lodged, the petitioners surrendered their licence as well as the weapon purchased and endorsed thereon to the police. Under the directions of this Court dated 5.9.2007 and on other various dates in all these petitions, the petitioners appeared before the investigating officer i.e. Additional Superintendent of Police, Special Organisation Group, Jhalana Mahal, Jaipur CID (CB) on the various dates as is evident from the police investigation diary and they have been interrogated. This fact has not been disputed by the investigating officer as also by the Additional Advocate General. According to learned counsel for the petitioners, nothing is to be recovered from the petitioners. So far as licence as well as the weapon endorsed thereon are already in the police custody as they have already been handed over to the police by each of the 5 petitioners and nothing is sought to be recovered. So far as the petitioners Lal Chand and Rajendra Shekhar are concerned, they are said to be holding the post of Additional District Magistrates at the relevant time and said to have converted the bore on the licence of M.L. Gun. From the perusal of the record it appears that by order of this Court, they appeared before the investigating officer and have already been interrogated and nothing sought to be recovered from them. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and the fact that all the petitioners have been interrogated and arms and licences in issue have already been deposited and are in the custody of the police, in my view, there appears to be hardly any necessity for sending the petitioners for custodial interrogation when nothing sought to be recovered, without commenting on the merit of the case, looking to the facts and circumstances of the case and having considered the oral arguments advanced by both the parties, I consider it just and proper to allow the bail application filed by the petitioners under Section 438 Cr.P.C. Accordingly, the bail applications filed by the petitioners u/s 438 Cr.P.C. are allowed and it is directed that in the event of arrest of petitioners Bhan Singh S/o Shri Kripal Singh in FIR No.309/07, Chet Ram S/o Shri Mallu Ram in FIR No.309/07, Vijay Kumar S/o Shri Baudu Ram Saini in FIR No.308/07, 6 Ghanshyam Saini S/o Baudu Ram in FIR No.309/07, Vijay Kumar Peswani S/o Bhagwan Das in FIR No.309/07, Lal Nath S/o Khetpal in CR No.309/07, Surendra Singh Dhaka S/o Jorawar Singh in CR No.308/07, Tara Chand S/o Ganpat Ram Jat in CR No. 308/07, Kana Ram S/o Hari Ram in CR No. 308/07, Prabhu Ram S/o Nand Ram in CR No. 308/07, Shri Dharampal S/o Sh. Milakh Raj in CR No. 271/07, Girdhari Lal Gaur S/o Shri Jethmal Gaur in FIR No.308/07, Sheesh Ram Ruhela S/o Shiv Kumar Singh Ruhela in CR No. 308/07, Dwarka Prasad S/o Dungar Ram in FIR No.271/07, Ajay Kumar S/o Dalip Singh in FIR No.309/07, Ajay Kumar S/o Nathu Ram in FIR No.309/07, Daljeet Singh S/o Baag Singh @ Hargovind Singh in FIR No.271/07, Lal Chand S/o Sh. Fagan Das Ojha in FIR Nos. 308/07, 309/07, 271/07, 252/07 & 220/07, Rajendra Shekhar S/o Jagjeet Lal Makkad in FIR Nos. 212/07, 271/07, 252/07, 309/07, 308/07 & 220/07 and Shri Sonu S/o Sh. Laxman in CR No. 212/07, all registered at Police Station, Kotwali, Sri Ganganagar, they shall be released on bail for a period till the police concludes the investigation and files the challan provided each of them furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.10,000/- alongwith one surety of like amount to the satisfaction of Investigating Officer to surrender and appear before the trial court on the date of filing of the challan after conclusion of the investigation on the following conditions:- 7 (i)That they shall make themselves available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required; (ii)That they 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 they shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court. The petitioners shall surrender before the trial court on the date of filing of the challan and move a regular bail. (H.R.PANWAR), J. rp