V. K. AGARWAL, J. ( 1 ) THIS is a petition filed under Section 482 Cr. P. C;, for issuing appropriate directions to the respondents not to arrest the peti-tioner in pending cases or in the alternative to be released on bail in the event of arrest. ( 2 ) ACCORDING to the petitioner, she and her husband are social workers and are running an institute named as Tribal Development and Training institute, Rajpur Dist. Sarguja, which is registered under the provisions of m. P. Societies Registrikaran Adhiniyam, 1973. The petitioner and her husband as well as other persons committed to the social work have been working in the tribal area of Sarguja for the upliftment of the tribals since 1976 and have undertaken various welfare projects such as opening of adult Education Centres, Plantation programme, Construction of well and ponds, providing fertilisers and seeds, etc. , to the tribal people of that area. ( 3 ) IN the year 1984, the petitioner conducted survey regarding the ownership rights of the tribals and on discovering that the tenancy rights of the tribals are not being granted by the Revenue Authorities to the tribal, the petitioner filed a writ petition in the Supreme Court, in which directions as per order Annexure A-l were issued. On failure of the District Autho-rities to comply with the said directions, a petition for contempt was moved by the petitioner and order as per Annexure A-2 was passed by the Supreme court, after which 'pattas' to about twenty thousand Adhivasis were distributed. ( 4 ) THE petitioner further alleges that on account of the above action on her part, the Superintendent of Police and Collector Sarguja, got annoyed and ten to twelve cases were registered against her and her husband and workers of the institute and the property belonging to their institute were damaged. The petitioner and her husband filed a petition under Article 32 of the Constitution of India before the Hon'ble Supreme Court, which was registered as W. P. No. 721/31, wherein vide order Annexure A3, dated 12-7-91, a direction was made that the petitioner and her husband shall not be arrested in pending cases and in future, without leave of the Hon'ble supreme Court. ( 5 ) AGAIN in May, 1993 there were some deaths in Rajpur Block of district Sarguja on account of stargation, upon which the petitioner's husband reported the matter to the Superintendent of Police as per Annexure a-4 and alsy got published the report as per Annexure A-5. The matter was also taken up by the Local MLA's and social and political workers and representations to the Authorities as per Annexure A-7 were sent. Due to the said action of the petitioner the Police and District Administration authorities got annoyed with the petitioner, and the Police party abducted the husband of the petitioner on 11-8-93 and he was in their custody upto 5-9-93. The Hon'ble Supreme Court was moved by the petitioner by way of a Habeas-corpus petition, which was registered as M. P. No. 4422/93. As per order dated 5-10-93 Annexure A-9, Hon'ble Supreme Court directed the District and Sessions Judge, Rajgarh to conduct an inquiry and ajso directed that the Police Guard be provided to the petitioner and her husband. The said petition was disposed of vide order dated 26-9-94 annexure A-10. ( 6 ) THEREAFTER the police arrested the petitioner on 22-10-94 in connec-tion with crime No. 120/93 and 154/93 and was humiliated and was made to walk on foot for about 3 kms According to the petitioner the Police has also registered crime No. 154/94 and 10/94 and also 5 other cases for petty offences against the petitioner and her husband. The petitioner and her husband, therefore by a petition, moved the Hon'ble Supreme Court again, which was registered as Cr. Misc. Petition No. 5139/94 in W. P. (Cr)no. 721/94 as per Annexure A-12 and the Hon'ble Supreme Court vide order Annexure A-13, directed that the same be heard on 14-11-94. ( 7 ) THE petitioner further avers that she is in jail and she has also moved a bail application before the High Court and that she has reasons to believe that again she may be arrested and humiliated by the Police Autho-rities and that her life ahd liberty is in danger. It has been averred by her that she has no criminal background and that she is being treated in the above manner because she has high-lighted the problems of tribals and apathy of District Administration. Hence, this petition under Section 482 cr. It has been averred by her that she has no criminal background and that she is being treated in the above manner because she has high-lighted the problems of tribals and apathy of District Administration. Hence, this petition under Section 482 cr. P. C. , praying that the respondents be ordered not to arrest the petitioner in pending cases or in altarnative, she be released on bail in the event of her arrest. ( 8 ) IN the reply of the State, it has been averred therein that the appli-cation has been rendered infructuous in view of the arrests already made by the Police with reference to the crimes enumerated by the petitioner in her application. According to the return the order Annexure A-3 of the hon'ble Supreme Court stands vacated in original petition No. 721/91 vide order dated 26-9-94 in disposing of the interim petition No. 4492/93 after the receipt of the enquiry expert from the District and Sessions Judge, raigarh. It has also been urged that the report of the District and Sessions judge, Raigarh has exposed the criminal and anti-social activities of the petitioner and her husband and it has observed that in the garb of Judicial orders the petitioner and her husband had terrorised; the inhabitants and officials of the Rajpur area. It is also averred that the petitioner and her husband has grabbed the Government land, as also the land of Adivasis and built up their own empire. It has also been averred that the earlier order has been vacated by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, vide order dated 26-9-94 whereby the interim orders passed in the petition No, 721/94 stand vacated. ( 9 ) IT may be noticed that in order Annexure A-3 dated 12-7-91, the apex Court had directed that the petitioner and her husband shall not be taken into custody in any case which is pending and in cases which has not been heard and without leave of that Court. ( 10 ) IT also appears that thereafter in Cr. M. P. No. 4492/92 in W. P. (Cr) No. 721/94 by order dated 5-10-93 filed with the return of the respon-dents and marked as Annexure A-2, District and Sesrions Judge, Raigarh was directed to conduct a fact finding enquiry in the matter, in view of allegations and counter allegations of the party. M. P. No. 4492/92 in W. P. (Cr) No. 721/94 by order dated 5-10-93 filed with the return of the respon-dents and marked as Annexure A-2, District and Sesrions Judge, Raigarh was directed to conduct a fact finding enquiry in the matter, in view of allegations and counter allegations of the party. ( 11 ) THE copy of the report of the District Judge, Raigarh has also been filed by way of additional documents by the petitioner in which finding as below has been recorded :"i find that the petitioners have failed to substantiate the charges that the respondents had kidnapped Shri Munna Lal Choudhary on 11-8-93 from Rajpur District Sarguja and had further kept him in confinement from that date till 4/5-9-93 and had also beaten him severally in the mean time. On the contrary it has been established from the evidence adduced by the respondents that both the petitioners Smt. Pushpanchala Bawa Choudhary and her husband Shri Munna Lal Choudhary have deliberately concocted an entirely false case of kidnapping and confinement of Shri Munna Lal Choudhary against them. "( 12 ) THEREAFTER the Apex Court by order, filed with the return of respondents, marked Annexure A-6 passed in M. P. No. 4492/93 in W. P. No. 721/91, observed : 'that in view of the reports submitted by the District judge, we find that we should not proceed with this petition any further. The authorities are free to act according to law. However, they will take care to protect the life and liberty of the petitioner and her husband. AH interim orders passed in these proceedings are vacated. The entire proceed-ings are disposed of. Notice issued in contempt petition is discharged. ' ( 13 ) LEARNED counsel for petitioner has urged that in view of the harassment which is likely to be meted out to her in future and the humi-liation that the petitioner is likely to suffer, the prayer as made by her in the petition for grant of bail deserves to be allowed. ( 14 ) LEARNED counsel for respondents as well as intervenor have urged that no blanket order for grant of bail can be made in favour of the peti-tioner as has been prayed by her. It has also been released on bail in the cases registered against her, as has also been mentioned by the respondents in their return. ( 14 ) LEARNED counsel for respondents as well as intervenor have urged that no blanket order for grant of bail can be made in favour of the peti-tioner as has been prayed by her. It has also been released on bail in the cases registered against her, as has also been mentioned by the respondents in their return. ( 15 ) IT may be pointed out that the Apex Court, as per Annexure A-6; in M. P. No. 4492/93 in W. P. No. 721/91, quoted above, has already directed the authorities to take care to protect the life and liberty of the petitioner and her husband. It is also clear that no blanket or general order for grant of bail deserves to be granted in favour of the petitioner. Therefore, i do not consider that any further directions are required in the matter and no general order for grant of bail, as has been prayed by the petitioner, in the present petition deserves to be passed. ( 16 ) ACCORDINGLY, the petition stands dismissed, .