JUDGMENT 1. - Heard. 2. Dan Singh deceased. Father of Vinod Singh informant, is stated to have died on 30.5.94. He had allegedly executed a will deed in respect of his property in favour of his brother Bhagwan Singh, petitioner. Bhagwan Singh applied for mutation of his name over the holdings left by Dan Singh. The informant objected to that. Thereupon Bhagwan Singh petitioner filed a revenue suit U/s. 188/212 of Rajasthan Tenancy Act against the informant. The revenue court issued an interim injunction against Vinod Singh informant and others. It is further alleged that the parties entered into a compromise with regard to the property involved in the revenue suit. Thereafter it is alleged on the petitioner that he was taken to the police station by two constables and there he was made to sign on certain stamped papers. It was thereafter that Vinod Singh is alleged to have lodged FIR in the present case wherein he accused the petitioner of having forged the signatures of his late father on certain will deed. 3. The main contention of the learned counsel for the applicant is that the genuineness or otherwise of the will is to be adjudicated upon by the revenue court as the matter is still pending there. 4. Looking to the facts and circumstances of the case it is directed that in the event of his arrest the applicant shall be released on bail on his furnishing two sureties in the amount of Rs. 5,000/- with personal bond in the amount of Rs. 10,000/- to the satisfaction of the officer arresting him and that he shall observe the following conditions: (i) that the person shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required; (ii) that the person 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; (iii) that the person shall not leave India without the previous permission of the court. *******