SHARMA, J. - (1.) HEARD learned counsel for the accused petitioner, learned Public Prosecutor and perused the case diary.
(2.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner contended that the investigation for offence under Sections 420 and 406 IPC is pending against the applicant. It is then contended that allegations in the complaint discloses a civil dispute between the parties and the complainant also issued a notice demanding Rs. 74080/- from the accused. On this strength learned counsel for the petitioner has prayed for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the bail application. Taking into consideration all the facts and circumstances of the case but without expressing any opinion on merits and demerits of the case I allow this bail application under Section 438 Cr. P. C. Therefore, the SHO/io of the Police Station, Clock Tower, Ajmer is directed that in the event of arrest of the petitioner Dilip Gupta in FIR No. 123/05 registered under Sections 406 and 420 IPC, he shall enlarge him on bail provided he furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) with one surety of the like amount to his satisfaction on the following conditions:- (1) that the petitioner shall make herself available for interrogation by Investigating 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 fats of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any Police Officer; (3) that the petitioner shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court. .;