Honble ARORA, J. – This bail application u/s 438 Cr.P.C. and the petition u/s. 482 Cr.P.C. arise out of the order dated 13.9.96 passed by the Sessions Judge, Jodhpur, by which the learned Sessions Judge granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner. (2). The relief which has been prayed by the petitioners in these two petitions is that though anticipatory bail has been granted to the petitiones by the learned Sessions Judge but that has been granted with some conditions and only upto filing of the challan. Their apprehension is that as soon as the challan is filed, the petitioners will be arrested. They, therefore, prayed that the petitioners may be granted unconditional anticipatory bail till the conclusion of the trial. (3). Learned Public Prosecutor, assisted by Shri Mehta-learned counsel for the complainant, on the other hand, have opposed both these petitions and submitted that a condition was imposed by the learned Sessions Judge that the petitioners will cooperate in the investigation but they are not cooperating with the investigation and, therefore, the anticipatory bail granted to the petitioners should be cancelled. (4). I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties. (5). So far as the preliminary objection raised by the learned Public Prosecutor and the learned counsel for the complainant that the petitioners are not cooperating with the investigation, is concerned, if it is so then the investigating agency may approach the learned Sessions Jude for cancellation of the anticipatory bail on the ground that the petitioners are not cooperating with the investigation and the lear- ned Sessions Judge will consider the application for cancellation of the bail and will pass an appropriate order in accordance with law. The preliminary objection raised by the learned Public Prosecutor and the learned counsel for the complainant is, therefore, over- ruled. (6). Now, coming to the merit of the case. The learned Sessions Judge has im- posed three conditions while granting anticipatory bail to the petitioners, namely, (i) that the petitioners will cooperate with the investigation; (ii) they will not, directly or indirectly, threaten the witnesses to disclose the facts before the investigating agency; and (iii) they will not leave the country without prior permission of the Court. These three conditions imposed by the learned Sessions Judge cannot be said to be, in any way, arbitrary, improper or unjust. These three conditions imposed by the learned Sessions Judge cannot be said to be, in any way, arbitrary, improper or unjust. They have been imposed by the learned Sessions Judge for early and proper investigation. These conditions do not require any interference. (7). Now, coming to the grant of bail only till filing of the challan, I am of the opinion that this condition requires modification and the same is modified to the extent that the anticipatory bail granted to the petitioners will continue even after presentation of the challan till the bail application, if any, filed by the petitioner, is decided. If the trial Court refuses the bail to the petitioners then the accused-petitioners will not be arrested for a period of ten days thereafter so that they may approach the high Court for the grant of bail. The trial Court will decide the bail application without being prejudiced by the order granting anticipatory bail or the order passed by the High Court. (8). With these observations, the application u/s. 482 Cr.P.C. is allowed and since the application u/s. 482 Cr.P.C. has been allowed and the order passed by the learned Sessions Judge has been modified, the application u/s. 438 Cr.P.C. has become infructuous and the same is hereby dismissed.