S.B. Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.6887/2006 Naurang Singh Vs. State of Rajasthan Date Of Order :: 9.11.2006 Hon'ble Mr. Justice Jitendra Ray Goyal Mr. Ashvin Garg, 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 and he is not the beneficiary. It is also submitted that the complainant himself stated in the civil suit that he signed over the registered sale deed and the accused petitioner being the attesting witness of that document has been implicated in this matter. It is also submitted that co-accused Gordhan, Behari Lal and Deep Chand who are the beneficiaries and principal accused have already been given the benefit of pre-arrest bail by a coordinate bench of this Court. 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 also keeping in view that co-accused persons Gordhan, Behari Lal and Deep Chand have been granted the benefit of pre-arrest bail by a coordinate bench of this Court, I deem it proper to grant the benefit of pre-arrest bail to accused petitioner Naurang Singh. In the result, the bail application is allowed and it is directed that in the event of arrest of petitioner Naurang Singh S/o. Ram Kumar Singh, he shall be released on bail by the concerned SHO/Investigating Officer in FIR No.431/1998 registered at Police Station Behrod, District Alwar provided he furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.30,000/- together with two sureties each in the sum of Rs.15,000/- 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 Court. (J.R. Goyal),J. VS Shekhawat/- Jr.P.A.