1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. CR.MISC.BAIL APPLICATION NO.9248/2009 Mahavir 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. Shri Satish Bijarniya for the complainant. ****** Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Public Prosecutor for the State, learned counsel for the complainant and perused the relevant documents placed before me. Contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that petitioner himself is a bona fide purchaser having purchased the plot in dispute from one Sudhir Anand. He duly executed the agreement to sale, the power of attorney and will in favour of petitioner on 18.4.2000 through one advocate Shri Nand Kishore Sain. It is contended that what is alleged is that Sudhir Anand had created certain documents showing the similar agreement to sale and power of attorney executed in his favour by one Tejmal and those documents were fictitious and forged. If that be so, petitioner cannot be held responsible for that and it is for that valid reason that petitioner approached the civil suit by filing civil suit and claiming temporary injunction against the respondents and when 2 the temporary injunction was not granted, he has filed appeal thereagainst. Although, learned counsel for petitioner submits that presently petitioner is not in possession of the disputed plot. Learned Public Prosecutor and learned counsel for the complainant have opposed the bail application and submitted that the documents on the strength of which Sudhir Anand claimed title in the disputed land have been found to be forged in view of the opinion of the handwriting expert and, therefore, petitioner should also be responsible for purchasing the plot on the strength of forged documents. Investigation is not still complete and therefore petitioner may not be granted the indulgence of pre-arrest bail. 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 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 Mahavir S/o Khemraj in FIR No.384/09, P.S. Nayapura, Kota for offences under Sections 420, 465, 467, 468, 471, 472 and 34 of IPC, he shall be released on bail by the concerned SHO/Investigating Officer, provided he furnishes a personal bond in the sum of 3 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/