ORDER : N.V. ANJARIA, J. Present is a successive bail application under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. Previously Criminal Misc. Application No. 4947 of 2017 was filed which was withdrawn on 30.03.2017 2. The applicant has been facing the offences punishable under Sections 498A, 306 and 114 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 read with Sections 4 and 5 of the Dowry Prohibition Act pursuant to the First Information Report being Crime Register No. I-05 of 2017 registered with Jetpur City Police Station, Rajkot on 19.01.2017. The present applicant is father-in-law and original accused No. 2. 3. As per the first informant, her daughter-victim had married to accused No. 1-Bashir Allarakhabhai Halepotra. The FIR contains the allegations of harassment with reference to the offences alleged stating that initially, the marriage span had went smoothly, but subsequently, in-laws started harassing her daughter. The present applicant is father-in-law - accused No. 3 in the FIR. As per the complainant, on 07.01.2017, she received telephone call from accused No. 1 about her daughter having taken poison. 4. Heard learned advocate Mr. Ashish Dagli for the applicant and learned Additional Public Prosecutor Mr. Manan Mehta for the respondent State. 5. After the first application for anticipatory bail was withdrawn by the present applicant, subsequent development which has taken place was order dated 19.04.2017 passed in Criminal Misc. Application No. 7591 of 2017 in case of Shahil Bashirbhai Halepotra-accused No. 4 in the FIR whereby this Court granted the said accused anticipatory bail. From the contents and the averments in the FIR, it could be successfully pointed out by learned advocate for the applicant that the allegations of harassment go parallel and the role of the present applicant would be placed on the same pedestal to that of Shahil Bashirbhai Halepotra-accused No. 4 who was granted anticipatory bail. Secondly, main accused No. 1, it was submitted, was released on regular bail by learned Sessions Court on 09.05.2017 in Criminal Misc. Application No. 75 of 2017. 6. Having considered the subsequent events read with the aspects emerging from the averments in the FIR, the Court is of the view that the discretion to release the applicant on anticipatory bail deserves to be exercised. 7. Application No. 75 of 2017. 6. Having considered the subsequent events read with the aspects emerging from the averments in the FIR, the Court is of the view that the discretion to release the applicant on anticipatory bail deserves to be exercised. 7. The Court also took note of the principles laid down by the Apex Court in Siddharam Satllingappa Mhetre v. State of Maharashtra [ (2011) 1 SCC 694 : AIR 2011 SC 312 ] and in Jai Prakash Singh v. State of Bihar [ (2012) 4 SCC 379 : AIR 2012 SC 1676 ] and other decisions in which parameters to be considered by the court for grant of anticipatory bail have been set out, and applied those parameters to the facts of the case. Since the Court was inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the applicant-accused, even as learned Additional Public Prosecutor made submissions to object the grant of bail, he stated that he would not invite detailed reasons. Learned advocate for the applicant also did not press for reasons. 8. In the facts and circumstances obtained and for the reasons recorded above, personal liberty of the applicant-accused deserves to be accorded primacy over his forced arrest. The investigational needs could be balanced by imposing appropriate conditions to be observed by the applicant-accused including the condition of keeping the right of the police open to ask for remand of the applicant-accused, if required. 9. As a result of above facts and aspects, present application is allowed and it is directed that in the event of the applicant's arrest in connection with the F.I.R bearing C.R No. I-05 of 2017 registered with Jetpur City Police Station on 19.01.2017, he shall be released forthwith on condition of his execution a personal bond of Rs. 25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand Only). 10. The anticipatory bail granted by this Court shall be further governed and regulated by the following conditions:— [i] The applicant shall cooperate with the investigation. He will make himself available for interrogation and for all in required; [ii] The applicant shall not obstruct the process of investigation in any manner. 25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand Only). 10. The anticipatory bail granted by this Court shall be further governed and regulated by the following conditions:— [i] The applicant shall cooperate with the investigation. He will make himself available for interrogation and for all in required; [ii] The applicant shall not obstruct the process of investigation in any manner. He shall not directly or indirectly induce threat or extend promise to any witness so as to dissuade and prevent such witness from disclosing such facts as may be required, to the Court or Police Officer; [iii] The applicant shall at the time of execution of bond, furnish full address of his residence and stay to the Investigating Officer as well as to the Court concerned. He shall not change the residence without prior intimation to the Court concerned during the pendency of the prosecution in the criminal case; [iv] The applicant shall not travel beyond the territory of the State of Gujarat without prior permission of the Court concerned; [v] The applicant shall surrender passport, if any he is holding, before the Court concerned immediately; [vi] The applicant shall appear before Jetpur City Police Station on 10.07.2017 between 11.00 am and 02.00 p.m; p.m; [vii] It shall remain open to the Investigating Officer to seek and file application for remand of the applicant, if in his discretion he considers the asking for remand of the applicant to be just and proper for the purpose of investigational needs. If such application for remand is made by the Investigating Officer, the learned Magistrate concern would consider the same on merits without being influenced by the anticipatory bail granted. 11. It is clarified that despite this order, the investigating agency is not precluded from applying before the competent Magistrate for police remand of the applicant. It is further provided that the applicant shall remain present before the Magistrate concerned on the first day of such application, if made, and on all such subsequent occasions as may be directed by the learned Magistrate in such proceedings. This would be sufficient to treat the accused as in judicial custody for the purpose of entertaining the application for remand by the prosecution. 12. The liberty available to the prosecution to seek remand shall be without prejudice to the rights of the accused to contend against or to seek stay against the remand. This would be sufficient to treat the accused as in judicial custody for the purpose of entertaining the application for remand by the prosecution. 12. The liberty available to the prosecution to seek remand shall be without prejudice to the rights of the accused to contend against or to seek stay against the remand. It is further clarified that the applicant even if remanded to the police custody, after completion of the remand period; shall be set at liberty immediately, subject to other conditions of this anticipatory bail order, to be complied with. 13. It is clarified that the observations made in this order are for the purpose of granting pre-arrest protection only. It is further clarified that the trial court shall not be influenced by any of the observations made in this order and the same shall be treated for the purpose of dealing with the present application only. 14. The present application is allowed in the aforesaid terms. Rule is made absolute. 15. Direct service is permitted.