JUDGMENT :

Ilesh J. Vora, J.

1. By way of the present application under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, the applicant has prayed for anticipatory bail in connection with the FIR being C.R. No. 11195060200551 of 2020 registered with Vav Police Station, District: Banaskantha for the offence punishable under Sections 376(1), 354A, 506(2) & 114 of the Indian Penal Code.

2. Learned advocate for the applicant submits that the impugned FIR is nothing but it is counterblast to the written complaint filed by the grand-father of the applicant against the father-in-law of the complainant only with a view to use arm twisting method, the present FIR has been lodged. He further submits that the land dispute is pending between the parties and with a oblique motive, after delay of 3 months, the FIR has been lodged against the present applicant. The applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the alleged offence. He has no past antecedent of like nature and custodial interrogation of the applicant is not essential for the purpose of investigation.

3. Mr. N.R. Desai, learned advocate for the complainant has opposed grant of anticipatory bail stating inter alia that the allegations against the present applicant are grave and serious in nature and as such there is no delay in lodging the FIR. Therefore, custodial interrogation is necessary for further investigation of the case.

4. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the respondent - State has opposed grant of anticipatory bail stating inter alia that the allegations against the applicant are grave and serious in nature and custodial interrogation is necessary for further investigation of the case.

5. Having heard the learned advocates for the parties and perusing the material placed on record and taking into consideration the facts of the case, it appears that prior to the FIR, the land dispute between the parties is pending. The victim is a married women. Upon bare perusal of the FIR, it shows that the FIR in question came to be lodged after 3 months of the alleged incident. The present applicant has Co-operated with the investigation and he has no any past antecedent of like nature. There is no possibility of his fleeing from justice and tampering with the evidence. Under such circumstances, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this Court is inclined to enlarge the applicant on bail imposing stringent condition.

6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the role attributed to the present applicant in the alleged offence, I find no reason to decline pre-arrest bail to the applicant. In the result, the present application is allowed. The applicant is ordered to be released on bail in the event of his arrest in connection with a FIR being C.R. No. 11195060200551 of 2020 registered with Vav Police Station, District: Banaskantha on his executing a personal bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand Only) with one surety of like amount on the following conditions:

(a) shall cooperate with the investigation and make himself available for interrogation whenever required;

(b) shall remain present at concerned Police Station on 15.02.2022 between 11.00 a.m. and 2.00 p.m.;

(c) shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the fact of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer;

(d) shall not obstruct or hamper the police investigation and not to play mischief with the evidence collected or yet to be collected by the police;

(e) shall at the time of execution of bond, furnish the address to the investigating officer and the court concerned and shall not change his residence till the final disposal of the case till further orders;

(f) shall not leave India without the permission of the Trial Court and if having passport shall deposit the same before the Trial Court within a week; and

(g) it would be open to the Invest