Tulsidas Ramsumiran Mishra vs State Of Gujarat on 7 November, 2014

[Cites 9, Cited by 0]

Gujarat High Court

Tulsidas Ramsumiran Mishra vs State Of Gujarat on 7 November, 2014

Bench: Anant S. Dave

         R/CR.MA/12394/2014                              ORDER



          IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR REGULAR BAIL) NO. 12394 of 2014
===========================================================
           TULSIDAS RAMSUMIRAN MISHRA....Applicant(s)
                            Versus
               STATE OF GUJARAT....Respondent(s)
================================================================
Appearance:
MR VAIBHAV A VYAS, ADVOCATE for the Applicant(s) No. 1
PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for the Respondent(s) No. 1
================================================================
         CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ANANT S. DAVE

                              Date : 07/11/2014
                               ORAL ORDER

1 Rule. Learned APP waives service of Rule on behalf of respondent - State of Gujarat.

2 This successive bail application is filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in connection with first information report registered at C.R.No.I35 of 2013 with Bopal Police Station, Ahmedabad for the offences punishable under Sections 606, 468, 327, 506(2) and 114 of the Indian Penal Code and under Sections 3, 4 and 7 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.

3 It is the case of the prosecution that as per the complaint, daughter of the complainant committed suicide in view of demand of dowry and for mental and physical cruelty by the applicant and in her laws. That date of incidence is 26.04.2013 and marriage life of the applicant was of 11 years. When initially Page 1 of 5 R/CR.MA/12394/2014 ORDER inquest panchnama was drawn on 26.04.2013, alleged suicide note was not recovered but on the next i.e. 27.4.2013. There are allegations of demand of four wheeler car and Rs.10 lacs and that continuous harassment by the applicant resulted into unfortunate incidence. Initially, application for bail was moved before learned Sessions Judge and the applicant came to be enlarged on regular bail on 04.05.2013. As against above, the complainant approached this Court and by an order dated 15.10.2013, this Court (Coram:

Hon'ble Mr.Justice S.G.Shah) cancelled the bail and the applicantaccused approached the Hon'ble Apex Court and Hon'ble Apex Court was not inclined to interfere with the impugned order. However, a liberty was reserved to the applicant to move an application for bail after chargesheet is filed and the concerned Court was considered the same on its own merits alongwith material available with the chargesheet. Once again, the applicant moved the concerned Court namely learned Additional Sessions Judge and the said bail application came to be rejected on 16.12.2013.

4. Mr. Vaibhav Vyas, learned counsel for the applicantaccused would contend that all allegations against the applicant are an afterthought. On the contrary, during subsistence of marriage life with the decease for about 11 years, the applicant fulfilled all reasonable expectations of his wife and out of wedlock two children were borne. The applicant is serving with Veeda Clinical Research Laboratory and having annual salary of Rs.10,89,000/.The applicant Page 2 of 5 R/CR.MA/12394/2014 ORDER has purchased a residential house by availing home loan from the Bank and installments are duly paid. Not only that but in Life Insurance Policy, name of the deceased is shown. It is submitted that circumstances weighed with learned Judge of this Court for cancelling the bail already granted to the applicant namely that powers were exercised by learned Sessions Judge within few days of registration of FIR in which earlier statements of witnesses were referred.

However, suicide note relied upon while cancelling the bail has no relevance at this stage in view of non availability of comparative material and report of FSL. It is submitted that the applicant is in jail since 29.11.2013 and by no stretch of imagination, it can be said that if the applicant is enlarged on bail by imposing conditions, there is likelihood of breach of any conditions or nonavailability of the applicant during trial which is likely to be prolonged. It is further submitted that considering the nature of allegations and by imposing suitable conditions, the applicant may be enlarged on bail.

5 Mr.J.K.Shah, learned Additional Public Prosecutor would contend that the applicant is involved in a serious offence and once bail granted by the trail Court came to be cancelled by this Court, recovery of suicide note with certain statements recorded during the course of investigation would reveal involvement of the applicant in the crime as above and by granting expeditious hearing of the trial, bail be refused in exercise of discretionary jurisdiction.

Page 3 of 5

        R/CR.MA/12394/2014                         ORDER



6    In   the   facts   and   circumstances   of   the   case

including allegations levelled in FIR, orders passed earlier and liberty reserved by the Hon'ble Apex Court to move a fresh application for bail after filing of chargesheet, prima facie this Court is of the opinion that the applicant is entitled for bail as prayed for in view of nature of his conduct before the incidence, manner in which he has taken care of his wife and children for 11 years of matrimonial life and alleged suicide note will be subject to scrutiny by the trial Court at the proper stage of evidence to be appreciated and trial is likely to be prolonged and availability of the applicant during the course of trial can be secured by imposing conditions. Hence, this Court is of the opinion that this is a fit case to exercise the discretion to enlarge the applicant on bail.

Hence, the application is allowed and the applicant is ordered to be released on bail in connection with first information report registered at C.R.No.I35 of 2013 with Bopal Police Station, Ahmedabad on executing a bond of Rs.1,00,000/ (Rupees one lacs only) with one surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court and subject to the conditions that he shall;

[a] not take undue advantage of liberty or misuse liberty;

[b] not act in a manner injuries to the interest of Page 4 of 5 R/CR.MA/12394/2014 ORDER the prosecution;

[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 at the concerned police station on the first Sunday of every month between 10 a.m. and 3 p.m for three months only;

[f] furnish the present address of residence to the I.O. 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;

7 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 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. Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent. D.S. Permitted.

(ANANT S.DAVE, J.) siddharth Page 5 of 5

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Gujarat High Court