CRLMB5308/2010 // 1 // IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR ORDER IN S.B. Cr. Misc. Bail Application No.5308/2010 Jairam and six others Vs. State of Rajasthan Date of Order ::: 16.08.2010 Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mohammad Rafiq Shri Jai Raj Tantia, Counsel for petitioners Shri Piyush Kumar, Public Prosecutor Shri Sanjay Sharma, Counsel for complainant #### By the Court:- Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned Public Prosecutor as well as the learned counsel for complainant and perused the material/case diary made available to me during the arguments of the case. Contention of learned counsel for petitioners is that the petitioners have been falsely implicated at the instance of the complainant, who alleged that a certain amount was extracted from village Panchayat way back on 02.03.2009 and the F.I.R. for the incident was lodged on 14.05.2010. All the seven petitioners have been falsely involved as accused whereas there is no such allegation from independent witnesses or the resident of village that any money was extracted by the petitioners. It is contended that the statements recorded by the investigating agency although has named all the petitioners but main focus is against accused-petitioner No.1 Jairam and accused-petitioner No.4 Inder Raj and therefore CRLMB5308/2010 // 2 // the others may not be allowed to be arrested because in F.I.R. was registered after 14 months. Learned Public Prosecutor and learned counsel for the complainant opposed the bail application. Having regard to the arguments and keeping in view the delay in lodging the FIR and the fact that the main allegation is against accused-petitioners Jairam and Inder Raj, the bail application of those two accused- petitioners is rejected. Taking into consideration all the facts and circumstances of the case and without expressing any opinion on merits and demerits of the case, I partly allow the bail application under Section 438 Cr.P.C. Therefore, the SHO/I.O. Of the Police Station Bansoor, District Alwar is directed that in the event of arrest of the accused- petitioners, namely, Lachha Son of Jairam, Gokal Son of Jairam, Dhudaram son of Inder Raj, Jagdish Son of Inder Raj and Satish Son of Inder Raj in FIR No.94/2010, registered under Sections 384 and 500 of the IPC, he shall enlarge them on bail provided each of them furnishs a personal bond in the sum of Rs.30,000/- (Rupees thirty thousand only) with two sureties of Rs.15,000/- each to his satisfaction on the following conditions:- 1. They shall make themselves available for interrogation by Investigating Officer as and when required; 2. They shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person CRLMB5308/2010 // 3 // acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the court or to any Police Officer; 3. They shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court. The bail application stands disposed of. (Mohammad Rafiq) J. //Jaiman//