JUDGMENT 1. - 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 police after investigation submitted Final Report in the matter, therefore, it appears that prima facie the applicant has a case for grant of anticipatory bail. 3. On the other band, learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the bail application. 4. I have considered the submissions made before me. 5. Taking into consideration overall facts and circumstances of the present case, I think it just and proper to grant anticipatory bail to the applicants. Accordingly, it is directed that in the event of arrest of applicants (1) Chuna Ram S/o Imarta Ram (2) Ramu Ram S/o Imarta Ram (3) Kishna Ram S/o Chuna Ram and (4) Modia S/o Chuna Ram by I.O./S.H.O. in F.I.R. No. 31/2004 P.S. Osian, they shall be released on bail provided each of them furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 30,000/- alongwith two sound and solvent sureties in the sum of Rs. 15,000/- each to the satisfaction of Investigating Officer on the following conditions ; (i) That they shall make themselves available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required; (ii) That they 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; (iii) That they shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court. Application allowed. *******