JUDGMENT : Mahesh Chandra Sharma, J. This bail application has been filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. Brief facts of the case are that an FIR No. 251/2014 was registered at PS-Mahuwa, Distt. Dausa for the offence/s under Sections 147, 148, 149, 171-F, 188, 332, 353, 336, 427 IPC and Section 3 of PDPP Act against the accused petitioner. During the course of investigation, the accused petitioner was arrested. Thereafter the petitioner moved bail application before the learned Court below under Section 439 Cr.P.C, who vide detailed impugned order dismissed the bail application. Hence this bail application has been preferred on behalf of the petitioner. During the course of investigation, the accused petitioner was arrested. Thereafter the petitioner moved bail application before the learned Court below under Section 439 Cr.P.C, who vide detailed impugned order dismissed the bail application. Hence this bail application has been preferred on behalf of the petitioner. la{ksai esa izdj.k ds rF; bl izdkj gS fd ifjoknh xaxkjke gky mi fujh{kd us iqfyl Fkkuk egok ij ,d rgjhjh fjiksVZ bl vk'k; fd izLrqr dh fd og ny la[;k 870020452] 51oha okfguh Hkkjrh; frCcr lhek iqfyl esa dk;Zjr gSA vkt fnukad 24-4-14 dks og nkSlk ftys ds egok fo/kkulHkk {ks= esa ernku dasUnz jkt0 m0ek0 fo?kky; ds cwFk la[;k 155] 156] 157 ij viuh daeuh ds lSD'ku ds lkFk pquko M;wVh dj jgk Fkk fd fnu ds yxHkx lk<+s X;kjg cts ernku dsUnz ij LFkkuh; yksxksa dh HkhM+ us ernku ckf/kr djus ds mn~ns'; ls dsUnz esa ?kqlus dk iz;kl fd;k vkSj vpkud HkhM+ us iFkjko 'kq: dj fn;k vkSj HkhM+ us mxz :i /kkj.k dj fy;k vkSj okgu LdkfiZ;ksa ua0 vkj0ts0 14 ;w0lh0 1114 dks vkx ds gokys dj fn;k rFkk nks vU; okguksa dks Hkh iRFkj Qsad dj {kfrxzLr dj fn;kA iFkjko ls ,d toku ds pksV vkbZ o muds vU; okguksa vkj0ts0 34,&1017 o vkj0ts0 0208 VSEi0 5507 dks Hkh {kfrxzLr dj fn;kA le; 12-40 ih0,e0 ij igqaps Jh lTtu flag iqfyl mi v/kh{kd egok o gsesUnz 'kekZ Fkkukf/kdkjh egok ds okguksa ij Hkh minzfo;ksa us iFkjko fd;k] ftlls ,d toku ds pksV vk;h vkSj muds okgu {kfrxzLr gks x;sA lqj{kk cyksa }kjk HkhM+ dks [knsM+us ds fy, ykBh cy dk iz;ksx fd;k ,oa HkhM+ dks rhrj&chrj djus ds fy, vkf[kjh mik; ds :i esa fu;af=r gokbZ Qk;j fd;sA minzoh HkhM+ dk usr`Ro djus okys o iFkjko djus okys rFkk vkxtuh djus okys euh"k] iz/kku] gfj;k ehuk] fjadw] fot;] vt; iIiw] nsoh lgk;] Hkwj flag] egsUnz] lksuw] yksds'k] txeksgu] fctsUnz] eukst vkfn izeq[k Fks o buds vykok pkj lkS vU; yksx Fks] tks vkxtuh o iFkjko dj jgs FksA HkhM+ dks rhrj fcrj gks tkus ds i'pkr~ lqj{kk cyksa o iqfyl QkslZ vkSj ekSds ij igqaps iz'kklfud vf/kdkfj;ksa }kjk 'kkafr LFkkfir dh xbZ vkSj iqu% ernku dsUnz ij ernku izkjEHk djk;k-------- vkfnA mDr rgjhjh fjiksVZ ds vk/kkj ij iqfyl Fkkuk egok ij izFke lwpuk fjiksVZ la0 251@2014] vijk/k /kkjk 147] 148] 149] 171 ,Q 188] 336] 427] 332] 353 Hkkjrh; n.M lafgrk o /kkjk 3 ih0Mh0ih0ih0 ,DV ds v/khu n.Muh; vijk/k ds vkjksiks esa ntZ dj vuqla/kku fd;k x;kA fnukad 4-12-2014 dks izdj.k esa izkFkhZ@vfHk;qDr ds fo:) /kkjk 173 8 na0iz0la0 esa vuqla/kku iSf.aMx j[krs gq, vU; lg & vfHk;qDrx.k ds fo:) mDr /kkjkvksa ds vkjksi cuuk ik;s tkus ij vkjksi i= U;k;ky; vfr- eq[; U;kf;d eftLVzsV] egok ds le{k is'k fd;k x;k gSA vuqla/kku ls izkFkhZ@vfHk;qDr ds fo:) /kkjk 147] 148] 149] 332] 353] 427] 171] ,Q 188] 336 Hkkjrh; n.M lafgrk o /kkjk 3 ih0Mh0ih0ih0 ,DV ds vijk/k ds vkjksi cuuk ikbZ tkus ij mudks bl izdj.k esa fxjQ~rkj fd;k x;k] tks orZeku esa U;kf;d vfHkj{kk esa gSaA 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case, he has nothing to do with the alleged crime, there is no case made out against the petitioner. It is also contended that neither the petitioner has forcibly entered into the polling booth nor has pelted the stones upon the public or any of the Government Servant. It has also been contended that the petitioner has also neither created any hindrance in the election process nor obstructed in the work of any security or police during election proceedings. It is submitted that the petitioner is a social and political worker, other co-accused persons namely Lajji Ram, Lokesh, Pintu etc have been enlarged on bail and the case of the petitioner is on better footing, hence , the accused petitioner should be released on bail. 3. On the other hand, learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the bail application and contended that the petitioner has pelted the stones upon the police security guards at Mahuwa polling booth and challan has been filed in absence of the accused petitioner, hence petitioner should not be released on bail. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties at length. 5. Looking to the facts and circumstances of the case especially the facts that petitioner is in judicial custody since long, other co-accused named above have been released on bail, but without expressing any opinion on the merits and demerits of the case, I deem it just and proper to release the petitioner on bail with certain conditions. 6. At this stage, this court asked the counsel for the petitioner as to whether he is agreed to abide by all such conditions which are being imposed upon the petitioner just to maintain the law & order situation, peace and tranquility etc, to which he has given consent and not objected to these conditions. 7. Therefore, with the consent of counsel for the petitioner, this bail application is allowed and it is directed that accused petitioner Sonu @ Surendra S/o Pradeep @ Bhondu shall be released on bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C. in connection with afore-mentioned FIR, provided he furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 5,00,000/- (Rupees five lacs) together with two sureties in the sum of Rs. 5,00,000/- (Rupees five lacs) together with two sureties in the sum of Rs. 2,50,000/- (Rupees two lac fifty thousand) each to the satisfaction of the trial court on the aforesaid conditions as also on the following conditions : (i) that the accused petitioner/s will appear before the concerned SHO, PS-Mahuwa, Distt. Dausa twice in a month for his personal appearance; (ii) that the concerned SHO shall mark attendance of accused petitioner in Rojnamcha,; (iii) that the concerned trial court or the Magistrate where the bail bonds are submitted by the petitioner, shall send a copy of this order to the concerned SHO immediately; (iv) that the accused petitioner shall appear before the concerned trial court on all subsequent dates of hearing and as and when called upon to do so. (v) The Collector, Dausa and the SDM, Mahuwa will obtain the information regarding the activities and location of the accused petitioner and if they found that he is involved in criminal or some illegal activities, in such circumstances, they will take their own decision subject to their satisfaction that whether the petitioner should be permitted or not permitted to reside in their jurisdiction till the Code of Conduct exists in force and if he is permitted to reside in their jurisdiction, then they will bound down the petitioner not to commit such type of offences in future, in accordance with the provisions of Criminal Procedure Code or any other law in force. (vi) In order to protect the rights of the petitioner with regard to casting the votes, the Collector, Dausa and the SDM, Mahuwa shall provide postal ballot paper to the petitioner and after receiving the same, the petitioner shall caste his vote through postal ballot paper in accordance with law; (vii) the concerned SHO shall monitor the case as to whether order of this court is being complied with or not; and if the petitioner is found to have breached/violated any of the aforesaid conditions, the SHO concerned shall be at liberty to move an application under Section 439(2) for cancellation of bail of the petitioner through the public prosecutor.