JUDGMENT 1. 1. Heard both the parties. 2. The petitioner is alleged to have committed under Sections 420, 467 and 471, IPC. 3. It is given out that one Bhalla has filed an FIR on 18-5-89 regarding an under Section 420, 467 and 471, IPC said to have been committed by petitioner, who was a Sarpanch on 1-5-86. 4. It is contended by Shri Pareek, learned counsel for the petitioner that it is evident from the certified copies of the election roll which has been produced for the perusal of the Court that name of Bhalla and his brother Mangaliya appear in the year 1975. But his name did not appear in the role for the year 1980/86 and 1988. It was, therefore, generally presumed that Bhalla was no more alive. It is submitted that those who are not heard of for more than 12 years, are presumed to be no more alive. It is contended that the Sarpanch in good faith verified the pedigree of the mutation of the land of Bhalla in favour of his daughter Ram Pyari and Roshan son of Mangaliya who is brother of Bhalla. 5. It is contended by Shri Sharma, learned Public Prosecutor that petitioner has wrongly verified the pedigree. therefore, he does not deserve to be given the indulgence of bail. 6. In the facts and circumstances, I am inclined to grant bail to the petitioner Birbal son of Shri Lohrikaran provided, he furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand Only) with one surety in the like amount, to the satisfaction of the trial court on the following conditions: (a) that the petitioner shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required: (b) 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 to any police officer; (c) that the petitioner shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court. Bail Granted. *******