1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. CR.MISC.BAIL APPLICATION NO.4464/2010 Nanhe Khan Vs. State Date of order : 18/8/2010. HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAMMAD RAFIQ Shri Surendra Sharma for the petitioner. Shri Laxman Meena, P.P. for the State. ****** Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Public Prosecutor for the State and perused the relevant documents placed before me. Contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the whole dispute arose when the petitioner was intercepted by traffic police and they wanted to challan him for violation of certain motor vehicle laws. There one Naeem Khan intervened and asked petitioner to go and thereupon the petitioner went. Thereafter, Naeem Khan was arrested and he was subsequently released on bail. There was no other case against the petitioner and he had no intention to violate the law. The motor cycle has been seized by the police, which admittedly is owned by the petitioner. Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the bail application. Having regard to the submissions made at the bar, the nature of accusation against the petitioner, the materials collected so far during the course of investigation and all other facts and circumstances of the case, I 2 deem it just and proper to grant the indulgence of pre-arrest bail to the petitioner. In the result, this bail application u/S.438 Cr.P.C. is allowed and it is directed that in the event of arrest of petitioner Nanhe Khan S/o Jamal Shah in FIR No.414/09, P.S. Vigyan Nagar, Kota for offences under Sections 143, 332, 353 and 379 of IPC, he shall be released on bail by the concerned SHO/Investigating Officer, provided he furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.30,000/- with two sureties of Rs.15,000/- each 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 him 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. (MOHAMMAD RAFIQ), J. RS/