1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN JAIPUR BENCH, JAIPUR ORDER SB Cr Misc Bail Application No. 7256/2010 Smt Santosh & anr Vs State of Rajasthan 11.8.2010 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MN BHANDARI Mr Yogesh Singhal - for the petitioners Mr Amit Poonia - Public Prosecutor Mr Anurodh Chaturvedi – for complainant BY THE COURT: Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused record of the case. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that no case is made out against petitioners for an offence under section 326 IPC thus petitioners may be granted anticipatory bail more so while rejecting bail application of co-accused Bhoj Pal, the co- ordinate Bench allowed bail application of co-accused Ram Mahesh. On the other hand, learned Public Prosecutor and counsel for complainant have opposed the bail application. They submit that cases are pending against Smt Santosh Devi-petitioner 2 No.1 and she was convicted previously. Looking to aforesaid, petitioners may not be granted bail. After taking into consideration rival submissions of the parties and without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, which may otherwise affect the outcome of the trial, but looking to the facts of this case, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner No.1-Smt Santosh Devi. Hence, her bail application is dismissed. However, I am inclined to grant bail to petitioner No.2-Tinku @ Pavan under section 438 CrPC. Therefore, the SHO/IO of the Police Station – Uchchain, Bharatpur is directed that in the event of arrest of the petitioner No.2-Tinku @ Pavan in FIR No.225/2009 registered for offence under Section/s 143, 341, 323, 324, 326 IPC, he shall enlarge petitioner No.2 on bail provided he furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- with one surety in the like amount to his satisfaction on the following conditions:- (i)He shall make himself available for interrogation by Investigating Officer as and when required; (ii)He 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 to any Police Officer; 3 (iii)He shall not leave India without previous permission of the Court. (iv)He shall not commit same and similar offence during the period of bail. At this stage, learned counsel for petitioners prays that liberty may be given to petitioner No.1 to surrender before the learned Magistrate. In view of aforesaid, petitioner No.1 may surrender before the Magistrate concerned and file a fresh bail application. If bail application is filed, the same may be decided expeditiously. (MN Bhandari), J. bnsharma