Gujarat High Court
Nishad Dhirubhai Kukadia vs State Of Gujarat on 7 August, 2018
Author: P.P.Bhatt
Bench: P.P.Bhatt
R/CR.MA/12868/2018 ORDER
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION NO. 12868 of 2018
======================================================
NISHAD DHIRUBHAI KUKADIA
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT
======================================================
Appearance:
MR GAJENDRA P BAGHEL(2968) for the PETITIONER(s) No. 1
MR HK PATEL, APP(2) for the RESPONDENT(s) No. 1
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.P.BHATT
Date : 07/08/2018
ORAL ORDER
1. This application is filed by the applicant under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for short, 'the Code') for regular bail in connection with FIR registered at C.R. No. I-16 of 2018 with Sachin GIDC Police Station, District: Surat for the offences punishable under Sections 406, 409, 420, 467, 468, 471 and 120-B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short, 'the IPC') and Section 66(D) of the I. T. Act.
2. Heard Mr. Baghel, the learned advocate for the applicant and Mr. H. K. Patel, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the respondent - State.
2.1 The learned advocate for the applicant submits that the applicant is an innocent person, however, he has been falsely implicated in the offence. It is submitted that the applicant was not named in the FIR Page 1 of 4 R/CR.MA/12868/2018 ORDER and subsequently, on the statement of the co-accused, he has been arraigned as accused. He submitted that no direct role has been played by the applicant in the offence in question. It is further submitted that in fact, the account of the present applicant has been used in the offence by the other accused. Further, the applicant has no criminal antecedents. Besides, now, the charge-sheet is filed in the case and hence, no further custodial interrogation may be required and there is no possibility of tampering with the evidence.
2.2 It is also submitted that by the learned advocate for the applicant that the applicant has roots in society and is also having responsibility towards family and is not likely to run away and his presence can be secured during trial by imposing the the suitable conditions.
2.3 The learned advocate for the applicant, on instructions, submits that without prejudice to his rights and contention, the applicant is ready and willing to deposit Rs.2 lakh before the trial Court concerned, but, some time may be given. However, he submits that the same may not be construed as admission of guilt on the part of the applicant.
3. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor opposes the grant of bail looking to the nature and gravity of offences. It is submitted that, from the charge-sheet, there appears prima facie case against the applicant in committing the alleged offence and accordingly, it is requested that the applicant may not be enlarged on bail.
4. Learned advocates appearing on behalf of the respective parties do not press for further reasoned order.
Page 2 of 4R/CR.MA/12868/2018 ORDER
5. Regard being had to the above submissions, in the facts and circumstances of the case and considering the nature and gravity of accusation made against the applicant in the First Information Report and other papers placed on record, this Court is of the opinion that discretion is required to be exercised in favour of the applicant for grant of bail as now there is no possibility of tampering with the evidence as charge-sheet is filed. Moreover, the applicant assures that he will abide by the terms and conditions that may be imposed by the Court and shall not commit any breach. Hence, the application is allowed and the applicant is ordered to be released on regular bail in connection with the above-referred FIR on executing personal bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten thousand only) with one surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court and subject to the conditions that they shall;
[a] not take undue advantage of liberty or misuse liberty;
[b] not act in a manner injuries to the interest of the prosecution and shall cooperate in trial;
[c] surrender passport, if any, to the lower Court within a week;
[d] not leave the State of Gujarat without prior permission of the Sessions Judge concerned;
[e] mark presence before the concerned police station on every Monday of each English calendar month for a period of three months and thereafter, alternate Monday for a period of six months, between 11:00 a.m. and 2:00 p.m.;
[f] furnish latest and permanent address of residence to the Investigating Officer and also to the Court at the time of execution of the bond and shall not change the residence without prior permission of this Court and shall also remain present as and when required by the Court;
Page 3 of 4 R/CR.MA/12868/2018 ORDER
[g] without prejudice to his rights and contentions of the either
side, deposit Rs.2 lakh (Rupees Two lakh only) before the trial Court concerned within 04 months of his release. On such deposit being made, the trial Court shall invest the said amount in fixed deposit in any Nationalized Bank in the name of Nazir of the Court, initially for a period of one year, which shall be renewed periodically as may be deemed fit and proper by the trial Court.
6. The authorities will release the applicant only if he is not required in connection with any other offence for the time being. If breach of any of the above conditions is committed, the Sessions Judge concerned will be free to issue warrant or take appropriate action in the matter. Bail bond is to be executed before the lower Court having jurisdiction to try the case. It will be open for the concerned Court to delete, modify and/or relax any of the above conditions in accordance with law. At the trial, the trial Court shall not be influenced by the observations of preliminary nature qua the evidence at this stage, made by this Court while enlarging the applicant on bail.
7. Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent. Direct service is permitted.
[ P. P. Bhatt, J. ] hiren Page 4 of 4