JUDGMENT 1. - The instant application under Section 438 Cr.P.C. has been preferred on behalf of the petitioners seeking pre-arrest bail in connection with F.I.R. No.129/2014 registered at Police Station Ramsinghpur, District Sriganganagar for the offences under Sections 341, 323, 324, 376(D) IPC. 2. Facts in brief are that a complaint was filed by the complainant Mst.'S' in the court of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Anoopgarh on 4.7.2014 alleging interalia that she was a resident of Chak 12 GM Gomawali. On 25.6.2014 she was alone at her house. Her husband had gone for doing labour job. Seeing her alone, Subhash entered into her house and committed rape with her. She was threatened that if she disclosed about the incident to anybody, she would be done to death and thus, fearing harm, she did not report the matter. On 28.6.2014 when she went to the fields for fetching fire wood, Subhash again caught hold of her and committed rape with her. Banwari also committed rape with her. She received injuries as the accused assaulted her after subjecting her to rape. The complaint was forwarded to the Police for investigation under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. where FIR No.129/2014 was registered and investigation commenced. The petitioners apprehending arrest have approached this Court by way of the instant application for pre arrest bail. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the complaint lodged by the complainant is patently false. She as a matter of fact had quarrelled with her husband. Her husband thrashed her up suspecting that she was of loose character and was carrying on with Banwari and went away to her maternal home. She also filed a complaint against her in laws on 29.6.2014. Thereafter, the matter was patched up between the husband and wife and subsequently, the complainant has filed the false complaint against the petitioners. He, therefore, prays that the petitioners deserve to be released on anticipatory bail. 4. A copy of the complaint filed by the complainant before the SHO Police Station Gajsinghpur Mst.'S' on 29.6.2014 has been placed on record. In the said complaint, the complainant alleged that she was married with Indraj resident of 12 GM Gomawali about 4 years ago. After the marriage, she was being continuously harassed by her husband Indraj, brother in law Mohan Ram and sister in law Kamali Devi on account of bringing less dowry. In the said complaint, the complainant alleged that she was married with Indraj resident of 12 GM Gomawali about 4 years ago. After the marriage, she was being continuously harassed by her husband Indraj, brother in law Mohan Ram and sister in law Kamali Devi on account of bringing less dowry. False and concocted allegations were levelled against her and she was taunted. On the previous night at about 9 O'clock she was thrashed up by husband, brother in law and sister in law due to which she received large number of injuries. A copy of her MLC has also been placed on the file. 5. In background of the aforesaid complaint, the learned counsel submits that ex-facie the facts of the FIR filed against the petitioners are proved to be false. He thus prays that the petitioners deserve to be granted anticipatory bail. 6. Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioners and submits that the petitioner subjected the prosecutrix to gang rape and thus, they do not deserve to be released on anticipatory bail. 7. I have heard the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the case diary. A copy of the complaint filed by the prosecutrix against her husband and in laws on 29.6.2014 at the Police Station Gajsinghpur is available on record of the case file. In the said complaint, the prosecutrix levelled allegations of dowry demand, harassment and physical violence against her husband and other matrimonial relatives. She was medically examined in relation to the said complaint and the MLC report shows a large number of injuries on her body. It appears that the spouses patched up their differences by way of a compromise on 3.7.2014 and the prosecutrix withdrew the allegations giving an undertaking that she would perform her matrimonial obligations faithfully. She also undertook that if her husband had any complaint against her, then he would be entitled to communicate this fact to her maternal relatives. It is only after this settlement that the FIR in question came to be filed. The Investigating Officer has recorded statements of two witnesses namely Panna Ram and Omprakash during investigation, who stated that the prosecutrix was having illicit relations with Subhash and Banwari. Indraj saw the immoral act on which he thrashed his wife the prosecutrix. It is only after this settlement that the FIR in question came to be filed. The Investigating Officer has recorded statements of two witnesses namely Panna Ram and Omprakash during investigation, who stated that the prosecutrix was having illicit relations with Subhash and Banwari. Indraj saw the immoral act on which he thrashed his wife the prosecutrix. Initially, the wife i.e. the prosecutrix reported the matter to the Police making allegations of harrasment and physical violence against her husband but thereafter, the matter was settled between the spouses and subsequently, the report in question came to be filed. The prosecutrix was medically examined on 29.6.2014 in relation to the complaint filed against her husband and in laws. She did not inform the doctor that she had been subjected to rape even though the sexual assault is alleged to have occurred prior to her medical examination. In this background, this Court is of the opinion that it is a fit case for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners. 8. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed and it is directed that in the event of arrest of petitioners Banwari and Subhash in connection with F.I.R. No.129/2014, Police Station Ramsinghpur, District Sriganganagar, the petitioners shall be released on bail; provided each of them furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 40,000/- along with two sureties of Rs. 20,000/- each to the satisfaction of the concerned Investigating Officer/S.H.O. on the following conditions:- (i). that the petitioners shall make themselves available for interrogation by a police officer 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 or any police officer; and (iii). that the petitioners shall not leave India without previous permission of the court. *******