1 S.B.CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1523/2008 (Smt. Ganki & Ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan) DATE OF ORDER : 21/04/2008 HON'BLE MR.H.R.PANWAR, J. Mr. M.L.Choudhary for the petitioners. Mr. Ashok Upadhayay, Public Prosecutor for State. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and Public Prosecutor for the State. Perused the order impugned. It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioners that the petitioner No.3 is the tenant of the premises and petitioner No.4 is his wife and it was the complainant who forcibly wanted to take possession of the house. So far as petitioner No.1 is concerned, she has not been specifically named. Looking to the facts and circumstances of the case and having considered the oral arguments advanced by both the parties, without commenting on merit of the case, I consider it just and proper to allow the bail application filed by the petitioners No. 1 Smt. Ganki, No.3 Manglaram and No.4 Smt. Kamla under Section 438 Cr.P.C. Accordingly, the bail application filed by the petitioners No.1,3 and 4 u/s 438 Cr.P.C. is allowed and it is directed that in the event of arrest of petitioners Smt. Ganki W/o Shri Junjarram, Manglaram S/o Shri Suraram and Smt. Kamla W/o Shri Manglaram in CR No. 115/2008 P.S. Bilara, 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 2 following conditions:- (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 No. 1,3 and 4 shall surrender before the trial court on the date of filing of the challan and move a regular bail. So far as petitioner No.2 Dharmaram is concerned, he has been specifically named along with the other co-accused Ramchandra alleged to have been armed with Lathi and therefore, without commenting on the merit of the case, in my view, it is not a fit case to release petitioner No.2 Dharmaram on anticipatory bail. The bail application filed by petitioner No.2 Dharmaram S/o Shri Bhanaram is, therefore, dismissed. (H.R.PANWAR), J. rp