and a car as dowry. Learned counsel submits that both the applicant and the complainant are majors and that any physical relationship, if at all established between them, was purely consensual. It is further argued that the allegations are omnibus in nature, the investigation is substantially documentary in character, and no custodial interrogation of the applicant is warranted. 4. Having considered the rival submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties, perused the material available on record, and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this Court is of the prima facie view that the applicant has made out a case for grant of anticipatory bail. At this stage, the allegations are yet to be tested during the course of investigation, and nothing has been brought on record to indicate that custodial interrogation of the applicant is indispensable for the purposes of a fair and effective investigation. The applicant has expressed willingness to cooperate with the investigation and there is no material to indicate that he is likely to abscond or tamper with the prosecution evidence. Accordingly, this Court is of the opinion that the applicant deserves to be extended the protection of anticipatory bail, subject to such conditions as may be imposed. 5. The anticipatory bail application is allowed. 6. In that eventuality of arrest, the Applicant shall be enlarged on anticipatory bail subject to his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties, each in the like amount, to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer (“AO”). In addition to it, the Applicant shall also comply with the
