J.R. Goyal, J.— Heard learned counsel for the accused petitioner, learned Public Prosecutor for the State and perused the case diary. 2. It was not alleged that the accused petitioner had inflicted any blow by sharp edged weapon on any vital part of the injured persons Kanhaiyalal, Kailash and Chhotelal. It was also contended that cross FIR has been lodged for the offence under Sec.308 IPC, wherein the accused petitioner Mangilal has also been shown to have received injuries. 3. Learned Public Prosecutor opposed the bail application. 4. Having considered the rival submissions made at the Bar, without making any observation on the merit of the case and keeping in view the fact that cross FIR has also been lodged against the complainant party. I deem it proper to grant the benefit of pre-arrest bail to the accused petitioner. 5. In the result, the anticipatory bail application is allowed and it is directed that in the event of arrest of accused petitioner Mangilal son of Suwalal, he shall he released on bail by the concerned SHO/Investigating Officer in FIR No. 66/06 registered at Police Station Pratapgarh (Alwar) provided he furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 10,000/- together with one surety in the like amount to his satisfaction on the following conditions: - 1. That the 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 them from disclosing such facts to the Court or any police officer; and 3. That the petitioner shall not leave India without previous permission of the Court. * * * * *