Satya Prakash Pathak, J.— I have heard learned counsel for the applicants as well as the learned Public Prosecutor for the State and carefully gone through the impugned order. 2. The contention of learned counsel is that complainant and petitioner are cousin brother and land in dispute was in joint tenancy. It is also submitted that land acquisition proceedings in relation to the disputed land took place, and therefore, after following due procedure, the compensation awarded in relation to the land in the name of petitioner was obtained by him. It is also stated that those proceedings were quasi judicial in nature and after notification, the proceedings were taken, therefore, simply on the basis of allegation that in the year 1956, the division took place of the land in the absence of cogent evidence and in the absence of Revenue record, cannot be said that petitioner has cheated in any manner. It is also submitted that prima facie, case for granting bail has been made out in favour of petitioner. 3. Learned Public Prosecutor opposed the bail application and submitted that petitioner has taken money of the land which was not in his share. 4. Taking into consideration overall facts and circumstances of the present case, without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, I think it just and proper to grant anticipatory bail to the applicant. Accordingly, the bail application U/s 438 Cr.P.C. is allowed and it is directed that in the event of arrest of applicant Abhay Singh S/o Laxmilalji Chaplot by I.O./S.H.O. in FIR No. 273/2006 P.S. Nathdwara, Distt. Rajsamand, he shall be released on bail provided he furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 30,000/- alongwith two sureties of Rs. 15,000/- each to the satisfaction of Investigating Officer on the following conditions: - 1. That he shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required; 2. That he 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 and; 3. That he shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court. * * * * *