Honble SHETHNA, J.–Heard the learned counsel for the parties. (2). Mr. Pradeep Shah, learned counsel for the petitioner vehemently submitted that the learned Sessions Judge has committed grave error in rejecting the anticipatory bail application of the present accused petitioner on 19.8.1998. Mr. Bhati, learned Public Prosecutor for the State, however, submitted that the co-accused anticipatory bail application was also rejected by this Court (Honble Mr. Justice S.C.Mital) on 3.7.1998. But Mr. Shah pointed out that the regular bail application of the co-accused has already been granted by the learned Sessions Judge on 5th August, 1998, therefore, he ought to have granted anticipatory bail to the present accused petitioner. (3). Ordinarily, when one of the co-accused is released on regular bail, then there cannot be any difficulty in granting anticipatory bail to the other accused. It can only be denied when special case is made out, which is not there in this case. It appears that in a most cursory manner, the learned Sessions Judge rejected the anticipatory bail application on 19.8.1998, though he himself granted regular bail to the co-accused on 5th August, 1998 only. This type of orders are adding to the backlog in this Court. It is hope and trust that the learned Sessions Judge should be more careful in deciding the case. It should not be decided in a most laconic manner. (4). Under the circumstances, I think it just and proper to grant anticipatory bail to the accused petitioner. (5). The I.O. of Police Station Ghanta Ghar, Udaipur in FIR No.40/98 is, therefore, directed that in the event of arrest of petitioner Nirmal Kumar, he be released on bail, provided he furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 5,000/- with one surety in the like amount to his satisfaction on the following conditions :- 1. That the accused petitioner shall make himself available for interrogation by a Police 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 facts of the case, so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court, or to any other Police Officer; and 3. That the petitioner shall not leave India without previous permission of the Court. This bail application is allowed accordingly.