JUDGMENT 1. :- The brief facts which are relevant for deciding this bail application are that an FIR was registered on 23.4.96 for offences under Section 420, 467, 468, 471, 477-A Indian Penal Code with the CBI, Jaipur containing allegations against the accused that during the period of 1994-95 one Shri R.S. Choudhary, an officer of the Bank of Baroda at its international Business Branch Ramganj Bazar, Jaipur conspired with an employee of M/s Ankum Exports Pvt. Ltd., to cheat the Bank of Baroda, Jaipur Branch of an amount Rs. 1.29 Crores by purchasing bogus/ fake export bills. According to the FIR Shri Sharad Shah was an authorised signatory to operate the account of the Company jointly with other authorised signatories, who alleged to have resorted to corrupt and illegal means to purchase bogus/fake export bills detailed in the FIR from the Company and also allowed them to avail undue favour on the basis of cash-credit facility in its account with the Bank. It was stated that thereby Shri R.S. Chaudhary caused wrongful gain to himself and to the Company as also wrongful loss to the bank. It is pertinent to state that in the entire FIR there was no whisper of an allegation against any of the Directors o the Company M/s Ankur Exports Pvt. Ltd. including the petitioner. 2. Petitioner-Rooplata Kumari and her husband Harendra Pal Singh both residents of Jaipur, presently in judicial custody, were arrested in pursuance of FIR No. RC 17 A/96 dated 23.4.96. In all seven accused were implicated in this case. 3. I have been informed that challan has already been filed against Sharad Shah, Radhey Shyam Chaudhary and Manish Bhansali. Udayjeet Singh and Inderjeet Singh SsJo Harendra Pal Singh who were directed to be present in the Court in pursuance of order dated 23.4.99 have presented themselves in the court today. It was directed vide order dated 23.4.99 that the propriety as regards their bail applications shall be considered and examined on merits subject to the accused-applicants moving for their bail application in accordance with law. 4. Shri Dalip Singh, the learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that the arguments which he is advancing on behalf of accused Udayjeet Singh and Inderjeet Singh are same which he is advancing on behalf of the sole petitioner-Rooplata Kumari. 4. Shri Dalip Singh, the learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that the arguments which he is advancing on behalf of accused Udayjeet Singh and Inderjeet Singh are same which he is advancing on behalf of the sole petitioner-Rooplata Kumari. Since the said accused have already surrendered themselves to the custody of the Court, I deem it appropriate to direct that the necessity of filing separate bail application on their behalf be dispensed with. 5. So far as the financial aspect of the matter is concerned, in my view the primary concern of the court while considering the bail application of the concerned petitioner/petitioners should be to assess their bonafides which should be determined at first instance, regard being also had as how to secure the interest of the revenue. It has been contended in this regard by the learned counsel that both Udayjeet Singh and Inderjet Singh who are Directors of M/s Ankur Exports Private Ltd., Jaipur are ready to cooperate with regard to discharge the onus cast upon them including the petitioners. 6. During the course of arguments, I have been informed that a sum of Rs. 1.50 Crore is due to Bank of Baroda from the accused which includes Rs. 1.29 Crore towards principal sum while the remaining amount is due on account of interest. 7. It has been further contended that in all bonafides the petitioners shall deposit Rs. 25.00 lacs within a period of three months from today while the remaining amount shall be deposited in monthly instalments within 12 months thereafter, in all 15 months from today @ Rs. 10.00 lacs each, the last deposit shall be of Rs. 15.00 lacs, i.e. by 31st July, 2000. This deposit shall be without prejudice to the rights of the petitioners and shall abide by the final results of the litigation, failing which the liberty of bail extended to the petitioners by this order shall automatically stand withdrawn. 8. Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case, it is directed that the petitioners (1) Rooplata Kumari (2) Udayjeet Singh and (3) Inderjeet Singh shall be released on bail on their furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 1.00 lac each with two solvent sureties in the sum of Rs. 8. Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case, it is directed that the petitioners (1) Rooplata Kumari (2) Udayjeet Singh and (3) Inderjeet Singh shall be released on bail on their furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 1.00 lac each with two solvent sureties in the sum of Rs. 50,000/- each to the satisfaction of the trial court and as regards accused-appellants No.2 and 3 namely; Udayjeet Singh and Inderjeet Singh are concerned, they shall be released on bail as directed above to the satisfaction of the Dy. Registrar Rajasthan High Court, Jaipur Bench provided (i) that the petitioners shall make himself/themselves available for interrogation as and when required (ii) that the petitioners 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 and (iii) that the petitioners shall not leave India without the prior permission of the trial court.Bail Granted. *******