JUDGMENT 1. - This order governs the disposal of bail application filed under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. by Shri Suresh Sahni, Advocate on behalf of the applicant B.L. Koli pertaining to F.I.R. No. RC Jai 2009 A 0013 CBI, Jaipur registered in the offences under Sections 409, 420, 471 of I.P.C. and Section 13 (2) read with Section 13(1)(C)(D) of Prevention of Corruption Act. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as also the learned Public Prosecutor for the State and perused the material on record 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has canvassed that the petitioner is being falsely implicated in this case. As per the First Information Report, the place of occurrence is said to have been at Delhi whereas the F.I.R. has been registered by Superintendent of Police, SPE, CBI, Jaipur who has got no jurisdiction to do so. The petitioner is innocent and he apprehends his arrest to be made by CBI, Jaipur, hence, he may be granted indulgence of anticipatory bail. 4. Learned Public Prosecutor appearing for CBI has opposed the bail petition on the ground that the SPE, CBI, Jaipur has got jurisdiction to register the case, as the petitioner has been posted as Divisional Manager, United India Insurance Co. Ltd., Division Office, Sikar, which is within the jurisdiction of SPE, CBI, Jaipur. He has cited a judgment reported in 2000 Cr.Law J., 682; Sushil Kumar Khajuria & Ors. v. The State. The learned Special Public Prosecutor has further contended that the petitioner is involved in very grave nature of offences, like that of cheating, forgery and corruption. He is alleged to have issued cover notes in many cases but he did not deposit the' amount of premium in the Insurance Company, thus, causing wrongful gain to himself. Hence, the petitioner should not be granted anticipatory bail. 5. Having considered the submissions made at the bar and carefully perused the relevant material on record, it is noticed that the order issued by Law Department Government of Rajasthan. Relied upon by learned P.P. relates to the creation of CBI Courts at Jaipur and Jodhpur. It does not confer any jurisdiction to the S.P. CBI, Jaipur. The learned Public Prosecutor was asked to let this Court know as to how the S.P., CBI, Jaipur got the jurisdiction to register the F.I.R. at Jaipur, for the offence having been committed at Delhi. It does not confer any jurisdiction to the S.P. CBI, Jaipur. The learned Public Prosecutor was asked to let this Court know as to how the S.P., CBI, Jaipur got the jurisdiction to register the F.I.R. at Jaipur, for the offence having been committed at Delhi. The learned P.P. has not been able to convince this Court that the SPE, CBI Jaipur has the jurisdiction to register the case at Jaipur for an offence having been committed at Delhi. The judgment reported in 2000 Cr.L.J, 682 does not support the argument of learned P.P. appearing for CBI, as it has got no nexus with the facts of the instant case. Mere posting of the petitioner as Divisional Manager in United India Insurance Co. Ltd at Sikar does not give him jurisdiction to lodge the F.I.R. at Jaipur for offences having been committed at Delhi. The learned P.P. utterly failed to convince that S.P. CBI, Jaipur has` the jurisdiction to register the case at Jaipur for the offences having committed at Delhi. I, therefore, in view of these facts and circumstances, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, do feel inclined to grant indulgence of anticipatory bail to the accused- petitioner. 6. The bail petition under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. is allowed and the SHO/I.O. of the Police Station SPE, CBI, Jaipur, is directed that in the event of arrest of the petitioner B.L. Koli S/o Late Shri Shorta Ram Koli in F.I.R. No. RC Jai 2009 A 0013 CBI, Jaipur, registered for offences under Sections 409, 420, 471 of I.P.C. and Section 13(2) read Section 13(1)(C)(D) of Prevention of Corruption Act, he shall enlarge him on bail provided he furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 500/- (Rs. Five Hundred Only) each with one Surety of like amount to his satisfaction on the following conditions: (i) He shall make himself for interrogation by Investigation Officer as and when required: (ii) 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; (iii) He shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court. (iv) He will not commit any offence during the period of bail. Bail petition dismissed. *******