JUDGMENT 1. Accused-petitioner, facing trial for offence punishable under Sections 302, 364, 201 read with Section 120B IPC in Sessions Case No. 97/2011, pending before Special Judge, Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (POA) Court, Jodhpur, District Jodhpur (for short, learned trial Court), has laid this application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. seeking interim bail for ten days. The sessions case aforesaid against him is founded on FIR No. RC7(S)/2011- CBI/SC-1/New Delhi. In the application, seeking interim bail for this duration, it is inter-alia averred that the petitioner is required to attend betrothal and allied ceremonies of his daughter Divya and son Vikram Bishnoi. 2. As per programs, Hawan and Jagran will be on 16.02.2019, followed by engagement ceremony of petitioners daughter Divya in the afternoon of 17.02.2019 at Bilara, and thereafter engagement ceremony of his son Vikram Bishnoi is slated on 19.02.2019 at Rohicha Kala at about 1:00 PM. 3. Mr. Rajesh Joshi, learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner, has argued that being father of Divya and Vikram, personal presence of petitioner during these ceremonies is necessary. Mr. Joshi has also argued that petitioner is facing trial since long and has already remained in custody for almost 68 months. Learned counsel would contend that if petitioner is allowed the benefit of interim bail to attend the ceremonies then he would surrender after availing the same and there are no reasonable apprehension of his absconding. 4. Per contra, Mr. Panney Singh, learned Special Public Prosecutor for CBI, has vehemently opposed the plea of petitioner. It is argued by Mr. Panney Singh that six regular bail applications of the petitioner were earlier rejected by this Court and the Apex Court too has declined him bail. Learned Special Public Prosecutor further submits that out of the total 197 witnesses cited by CBI in the matter, 196 have already been examined and only one foreigner witness(from U.S.), remains to be examined. Mr. Singh, on being confronted, has submitted that next date of hearing before the learned trial Court is 28.02.2019. Mr. Singh contends that there are reasonable apprehension that petitioner may not surrender in case he is granted benefit of interim bail being an influential person. He further submits that earlier also petitioner was denied interim bail on many occasions. 5. I have bestowed my consideration to the arguments advanced at Bar. 6. Mr. Singh contends that there are reasonable apprehension that petitioner may not surrender in case he is granted benefit of interim bail being an influential person. He further submits that earlier also petitioner was denied interim bail on many occasions. 5. I have bestowed my consideration to the arguments advanced at Bar. 6. While it is true that petitioner is facing trial for serious offences and trial is on the verge of completion but the prayer made in the application for interim bail is essentially founded on substantial grounds inasmuch the petitioner has prayed for releasing him on bail to attend betrothal ceremonies of his daughter and son as per scheduled programs. It goes without saying that participation and presence of father is necessary in social functions of engagement ceremonies of his daughter and son. However, the interim bail cannot be granted as craved by the petitioner in the backdrop of facts of the case and Court can only extend this concession on compassionate grounds and other social considerations for a reasonable duration. In view thereof, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, I deem it just and appropriate to release petitioner on interim bail for five days and he may be released on 15.02.2019 evening latest by 05:00 PM with a direction to surrender before the concerned jail authority on or before 20.02.2019 latest by 01:00 PM. The petitioner is required to furnish a personal bond of Rs. 2,00,000/- with two sureties of like amount to the satisfaction of learned trial Court with written undertaking that he would surrender after availing the period of interim bail.