JUDGMENT : 1. Heard through video conferencing. 2. This is first application u/S.438 Cr.P.C. for grant of anticipatory bail by the petitioner. 3. Petitioner apprehends arrest in connection with offence punishable u/Ss. 120-B, 201, 204, 408, 419, 420, 468, 471, 477-A IPC., Ss. 13(2), 13(1)(d) of Prevention of Corruptions Act, 1988 and Ss. 4/3D (1)(2) of M.P. Recognized Examinations Act, 1937 registered as RC2172015S0009 (Crime No. 271/2014) pending before IV Additional Sessions Judge/Special Judge CBI (VYAPAM), (M.P.). 4. Petitioner who is a practicing Doctor apprehends arrest in respect of offence of cheating and forgery in PMT Examination 2011 conducted by VYAPAM. 5. Learned counsel for CBI Shri Newaskar by filing reply informs that charge-sheet qua petitioner has been filed on 7/1/2021. Reply also reveals that petitioner has cooperated in investigation process as and when summoned by Investigating Agency and therefore custodial interrogation is not required. 6. Moreover, the principle laid down by Apex Court including the case of Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre vs. State of Maharashtra and others (2011) 1 SCC 694 and subsequent decisions not only emphasize the importance of gravity of offence but also the attribute of accused cooperating in investigation and trial as one of the persuading considerations while exercising jurisdiction u/S. 438 Cr.P.C. In the instant case, petitioner as is evident from reply of CBI has appeared as and when required during investigation. Thus, sending petitioner to custody in the given facts would be akin to punishing him for the offence which is yet to be established thereby violating the fundamental principle of criminal jurisprudence i.e. "presumption of innocence". 7. Among few important factors to be considered while deciding application for anticipatory bail are gravity of offence and also conduct of accused in cooperating in investigation and the prospects of doing so in future and also in trial. Apex court in case of Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre Vs. State of Maharashtra and Others (supra) in somewhat similar situation came to hold :- "89. It is imperative for the courts to carefully and with meticulous precision evaluate the facts of the case. The discretion must be exercised on the basis of the available material and the facts of the particular case. State of Maharashtra and Others (supra) in somewhat similar situation came to hold :- "89. It is imperative for the courts to carefully and with meticulous precision evaluate the facts of the case. The discretion must be exercised on the basis of the available material and the facts of the particular case. In cases where the court is of the considered view that the accused has joined investigation and he is fully cooperating with the investigating agency and is not likely to abscond, in that event, custodial interrogation should be avoided. 90. A great ignominy, humiliation and disgrace is attached to the arrest. Arrest leads to many serious consequences not only for the accused but for the entire family and at times for the entire community. Most people do not make any distinction between arrest at a pre-conviction stage or post-conviction stage. Whether the powers under section 438 Cr.P.C. are subject to limitation of section 437 Cr.P.C." 8. Said judgment has been referred with approval in subsequent decision of Apex Court in Bhadresh Bipinbhai Sheth Vs. State of Gujarat & Another (2016)1 SCC 152 and also in Sushila Aggarwal and others Vs. State (Nct of Delhi) and another (2020) 5 SCC 1 but with certain reservations in regard to the aspect of imposition of conditions while granting anticipatory bail. 9. After hearing learned counsel for rival parties and considering the fact that investigation in the matter qua petitioner is over and thus custodial interrogation is not required and that petitioner appears to have participated in the investigation by appearing as and when summoned, this court without entering into merits of the matter lest it may prejudice learned trial judge, this court deems it appropriate to confirm and continue the interim order passed by this court on 27.01.2021 till finalization of the trial subject to the following additional condition:- The petitioner as a Shiksha Swayamsevak shall render physical and financial assistance to government primary school situated nearest to residence of petitioner for ensuring hygiene and sanitation and for removing deficiencies of infrastructural amenities in the said school from the skill/resources of the petitioner. [ ;kfpdkdrkZ ,d f'k{kk Lo;alsod ds #i esa vius fuokl ds fudV vofLFkr ljdkjh ÁkFkfed fo|ky; esa LoPNrk vkSj vkjksX; dks lqfuf'pr djus ds fy, 'kkjhfjd ,oa foRrh; lgk;rk Ánku djsxh rFkk vius dkS'ky o lalk/kuksa ls mDr fo|ky; esa volajpukRed lqfo/kkvksa dh dfe;ksa dks nwj djsxhA ] The petitioner after selecting a particular Govt. Primary School shall inform about the same to the office of Gram Panchayat (in case of rural area) and/or Ward Officer of the concerned ward (in case of urban area), within whose territorial jurisdiction the said school is situated. [ ;kfpdkdrkZ ,d fof'k"V ÁkFkfed ljdkjh Ldwy dk p;u djus ds i'pkr blds ckjs esa xzke iapk;r ds dk;kZy; ¼xzkeh.k {ks= ds ekeys esa½ vkSj@;k lEcaf/kr okMZ ds okMZ vf/kdkjh ¼'kgjh {ks= ds ekeys esa½ ftlds {ks=kf/kdkj esa mDr Ldwy vofLFkr gS] dks lwfpr djsxhA ] It will be joint responsibility of Sarpanch and Secretary of said Gram Panchayat (in case of rural area) and/or Ward Officer of the concerned ward (in case of urban area) to preserve the said information provided by the petitioner. [ ;g lEcaf/kr okMZ ds okMZ vf/kdkjh ¼'kgjh {ks= ds ekeys esa½ vkSj@;k mDr xzke iapk;r ds ljiap vkSj lfpo ¼xkeh.k {ks= ds ekeys esa½ dh la;qDr ftEesnkjh gksxh fd] ;kfpdkdrkZ }kjk ÁnRr lwpuk dks lajf{kr djsA ] 10. The registry of this Court shall communicate this order through Legal Aid Officer, SALSA, Gwalior to the Collector, District Education Officer, Block Education Officer of the district/block concerned for information and compliance. 11. A copy of this order be supplied to the Legal Aid Officer, SALSA, Gwalior who is directed to communicate this order to the District Education Officer, Block Education Officer of the district/block concerned to verify as to whether petitioner has complied with the aforesaid condition or not and submit report once every month. 12. In case, report regarding aforesaid condition is not filed or report is found to be wanting in any manner then Registry is directed to list this matter as PUD before appropriate Bench. 13. This anticipatory bail application is, thus, stands allowed. This order be read in conjunction with the interim anticipatory bail order dated 27.01.2021 passed in this case. 14. A copy of this order be sent for the Court concerned for compliance. C.C. as per rules.