JUDGMENT : DEEPAK MAHESHWARI, J. 1. This bail application under Section 438 Cr. P.C. has been preferred on behalf of the accused-petitioner-Smt. Hemlata in FIR No. 202/2015, Police Station Arthuna, District Banswara registered for the offence punishable under Sections 420, 467, 471, 120-B of the Indian Penal Code. 2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that Smt. Hemlata was earlier known as 'Kali' prior to her marriage. Thereafter, her name was changed as Hemlata. She contested the election during the period 2005 to 2009 in the name of Hemlata. Now, in the year 2015, she has also contested the election as Hemlata. Learned counsel submits that Hemlata also worked on the honorary post of Saathin in Aaganbari but after being elected as Sarpanch, she has resigned from that post and has not drawn any salary for the said post. The said resignation has also been accepted w.e.f. 1st April, 2015. 3. Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the prayer saying that the petitioner has over written in the mark sheet of 8th Class and the certificate which was issued in the name of 'kali' has been produced to have issued in the name of Hemlata but he conceded the fact that Hemlata and Kali are not different persons. 4. In view of the fact that the name of the petitioner earlier known as 'Kali' has been changed as 'Hemlata' and they are not different persons in these names, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this Court is inclined to grant the protection of anticipatory bail to the accused-petitioner-Smt. Hemlata. 5. Accordingly, the bail application under Section 438 Cr. 5. Accordingly, the bail application under Section 438 Cr. P.C. is allowed and it is directed that in the event of arrest of petitioner Smt. Hemlata wife of Raman Lal Bamaniya in connection with F.I.R. No. 202/2015, Police Station Arthuna, District Banswara, the petitioner-Smt. Hemlata shall be released on bail; provided she furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- along with two sureties of Rs.25,000/- each to the satisfaction of the concerned Investigating Officer/S.H.O. on the following conditions :- (i) That the petitioner shall make them selves available for interrogation by a Police Officer as and when required; (ii) That the petitioner 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 petitioner shall not leave India without previous permission of the Court.