1 S.B.Cr.Misc. Bail Appli. No.5815/2007 (Rajkumar vs. State of Rajasthan) Date of order : April 09, 2008 HON'BLE MR.H.R.PANWAR,J. Mr. S.G.Ojha, for the petitioner. Mr.Ashok Upadhyaya, P.P. for the State. Mr.Dharmendra Surana, for the first informant. On 29.11.2007, counsel representing the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is prepared to hand over the dowry articles alleged to have been belonging to the first informant. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that whatever the articles were available, they have been handed over to the police. Learned Public Prosecutor and the counsel appearing for the first informant submit that the ornaments have not been handed over. They have pointed out certain ornaments, which are yet to be returned to the complainant and since other co- accused have already been granted anticipatory bail, therefore, there is no likelihood to effect recovery from them. Petitioner being the husband failed to return the certain articles and, therefore, a custodial interrogation is necessary. 2 In this view of the matter, when the entire jewellery has not been recovered, in my view, it is not a fit case to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner, on the contrary a custodial interrogation is necessary. The bail application filed by the petitioner under section 438 Cr.P.C. is, therefore, dismissed. [H.R.PANWAR],J m.asif/-