In the High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan At Jaipur Bench, Jaipur O R D E R In S.B. Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.6143/06 Gajraj Singh and others Vs. State of Rajasthan Date Of Order :: 16th November, 2006 Hon'ble Mr. Justice Jitendra Ray Goyal Mr. Karanpal Singh, counsel for petitioners. Mr. R.P. Kuldeep, Public Prosecutor for State. .................... Heard learned counsel for accused petitioners, learned Public Prosecutor for the State, perused the case diary and other material produced during the course of arguments. It is contended on behalf of the accused petitioners that Pooran Singh is uncle, Harendra Singh is brother and Resham is mother of the accused petitioner Gajraj Singh who was married with the complainant Urmila Devi in the childhood. It is also contended that Urmila Devi after marriage never came at her in-laws house and just to harass the accused petitioners this false FIR has been lodged. It is also submitted that Pooran Singh, Harendra Singh and Resham are residing separately from Gajraj Singh and they all have been interrogated by the police in this matter. Learned Public Prosecutor opposed the bail application. Without making any observation on merits, having considered the rival submissions made at the bar, nature of accusation, material collected during the course of investigation wherein this fact also came that marriage of the complainant was solemnized in the childhood and she never resided at her in-laws house and all other facts and circumstances, I deem it proper to grant the benefit of pre- arrest bail to accused petitioners Gajraj Singh, Pooran Singh, Harendra Singh and Resham. In the result, the bail application is allowed and it is directed that in the event of arrest of petitioners Gajraj Singh, Pooran Singh, Harendra Singh and Resham, they shall be released on bail by the concerned SHO/Investigating Officer in FIR No.198/2006 registered at Police Station Mahuwa, District Dausa provided each of them furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.10,000/- together with two sureties each in the sum of Rs.5,000/- to his satisfaction on the following conditions :- 1. that the petitioners shall make themselves available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required; 2. that the petitioners 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 them from disclosing such facts to the Court or any police officer; and 3. that the petitioners shall not leave India without previous permission of the Court. (J.R. Goyal),J VS Shekhawat/- Jr. P.A.