Gujarat High Court
Harshit Indravadan Talati vs State Of Gujarat on 3 May, 2017
Author: N.V.Anjaria
Bench: N.V.Anjaria
R/CR.MA/8109/2017 ORDER
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL ) NO. 8109 of
2017
==========================================================
HARSHIT INDRAVADAN TALATI....Applicant(s)
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT....Respondent(s)
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR ANSHIN H DESAI, SR ADVOCATE WITH MR PRAVIN GONDALIYA,
ADVOCATE for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR RS SANJANWALA, SR ADVOCATE WITH MR NANDISH H THACKAR,
ADVOCATE for the Respondent(s) No. 1
MR LB DABHI, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.V.ANJARIA
Date : 03/05/2017
ORAL ORDER
Rule, returnable forthwith. Learned
Additional Public Prosecutor Mr.L.B. Davhi waives
service of Rule on behalf of the respondent-State. Learned advocate Mr.Nandish Thackar waives service of Rule for private respondent-original complainant. In the facts and circumstances of the case, the application was taken up for final consideration today.
2. It is in connection with the First Information Report bearing Crime Register No.I-05 of 2012 registered with Gandhinagar Zone Police Station, CID (Crime), Gandhinagar on 21st May, 2012 against the Page 1 of 20 HC-NIC Page 1 of 20 Created On Tue Aug 15 16:09:23 IST 2017 R/CR.MA/8109/2017 ORDER present applicant-accused for the offences under Sections 406, 409, 420, 465, 467, 468, 471, 477A and 120B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, that this application under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 is presented by the applicant.
3. The first informant claimed to be the power of attorney of one Divyangbhai Upendrabhai Jha who in turn claimed that he was owner of Plot No.A/71 in the Gayatrinagar Co-operative Housing Society. It was stated that the said member had paid development charges, membership fee and society's contribution and that he was holding share certificate and thus the plot was purchased by the said member. It was next alleged that when details and the documents about the society were asked from the District Registrar, he knew that society was consisting of group of five different societies named Valkeshwar Group, Parla Group, Agriculture Group, Alkapuri Group and Balasinor Group. The society owned lands at Village Kamalpura. The office bearers had got passed the maps and the plots were allotted. The development charges were collected in the name of one Samir Builders Private Limited and 710 number of plots were earmarked.
3.1 It was next alleged that in October, 2010 one Kantibhai Ambalal Patel gave advertisement in the newspaper that he wanted to purchase lands of the society and advertisement for clearance was given. Certain members raised objections. District Registrar had thereafter directed inquiry into the alleged irregularity in the society in respect of which the Page 2 of 20 HC-NIC Page 2 of 20 Created On Tue Aug 15 16:09:23 IST 2017 R/CR.MA/8109/2017 ORDER inquiry officer submitted report on 01st January, 2010. It was thereafter alleged that however the said inquiry officer concluded to withhold the inquiry report and no consequential action was taken and that the officers colluding with the each other did not permit filing of any criminal proceeding.
3.2 It was alleged further that the said Kantibhai and his group was not member but tried to grab the land of the society which was of the ownership of the different members of the society. It was alleged that said Kantibhai colluded with the President of the society in the year 2001 and by forging documents, created a false agreement to sell. Said Kantibhai thereafter again sold the land to one Jalaram Land Developers. Said Developers plotted out the land and in company with said Kantibhai, booked plots by collecting contributions from the purchasers. Out of the money received, a sizable amount of Rs.06.00 lakhs was received by said Kantibhai. It was next alleged that Kantibhai Ambalal Patel filed Civil Suit in the Vadodara Court and which was compromised.
3.3 The allegations narrated in the F.I.R. about forging the documents, vouchers, allotment letters, etc., of the society and illegally disposing of the land of the society to benefit himself and the family members of said Kantibhai Patel. The F.I.R. in its crux alleged that accused persons (i) Kantilal Ambalal Patel, (ii) Dollyben Kantilal Patel, (iii) Ashokbhai Desaibhai Patel, (iv) Sachin Rajendra Patel, (v) Haresh Shashikant Patel, (vi) Kishor N. Bhatt, (vii) Page 3 of 20 HC-NIC Page 3 of 20 Created On Tue Aug 15 16:09:23 IST 2017 R/CR.MA/8109/2017 ORDER Jitendra Shashikant Patel and (viii) Jashbhai Shankarbhai Patel criminal conspired and a huge chunk of land running into crores of rupees were tried to be grabbed by forging signatures and by forging documents as genuine and in collusion with the office bearers of the society.
3.4 In the F.I.R. filed on 21st May, 2012 for the offences under Sections 406, 409, 420, 465, 467, 468, 471, 477A and 120B, IPC, the role of the abovenamed accused persons were indicated. The present applicant was not named. He was not shown to be in picture during the time said alleged irregularities took place. The Gandhinagar Zone Police filed supplementary chargesheet bearing No.220 of 2016 wherein in column No.2 name of the present applicant was shown. At that time investigation was in progress.
3.5 The above narrated allegations in the First Information Report are placed in the set of the following facts and events in the background. They are relevant to be highlighted.
(i) In March, 1984 one Gayatri Co-operative Housing Society Limited was registered. It owned land bearing survey No.54 admeasuring 69406 Sq. Meters at Village Kamlapura, Taluka Vaghodiya, Vadodara. During the period 1987 to 1988 lands of the society were converted into non-agriculture. In all there are five abovementioned groups of societies to which the lands belong;
(ii) On 14th May, 2001 the Assistant District
Page 4 of 20
HC-NIC Page 4 of 20 Created On Tue Aug 15 16:09:23 IST 2017
R/CR.MA/8109/2017 ORDER
Registrar, Co-operative Societies, granted permission for sale of the land belonging to the society-all five groups. Thereafter on 20th June, 2001 said Kantilal Ambalal Patel-Karta of HUF entered into an agreement of sale for the decided price of Rs.89,36,130/-;
(iii) Said Kantilal had an occasion to institute Special Civil Suit No.149 of 2005 before the Civil Court at Vadodara against the societies, praying for specific performance of the agreement to sell. The suit was instituted on 30th March, 2005. Therein a compromise decree was drawn on 13th May, 2005 in view of compromise dated 30th April, 2005;
(iv) A public notice was given in the newspaper "Sandesh Daily" for title clearance of the society on 06th May, 2007 by the advocate, and as no objections were received, the title clearance certificate was given;
(v) The abovementioned consent-decree was registered with the office of Sub Registrar, Vaghodiya at Serial No.71. Pursuant to the consent decree, said Kantilal Patel got executed registered sale deed in his favour through office bearer of the society.
Revenue Entry No.436 to 439 as well as No.2157 were mutated on 27th November, 2010 and certified on 01st April, 2011;
(vi) All the five societies to which the land belonged, went into liquidation as per order dated 08th September, 2011. Registration of all the societies came to be cancelled by the competent authority on 03rd Page 5 of 20 HC-NIC Page 5 of 20 Created On Tue Aug 15 16:09:23 IST 2017 R/CR.MA/8109/2017 ORDER October, 2011;
(vii) It is at this stage that the applicant herein entered into Banakhat dated 31st December, 2011 seeking to purchase the land from the said Karta (HUF). The lands described as (1) Block Nos.45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52-A, 52-B and 54 situated at Village Kamlapura, Taluka Vaghodiya, District Vadodara, total admeasuring 3,11,104 Sq. Meters and (2) Survey Nos.320, 321/1, 328 and 332 situated at Village Pipaliya, Taluka Vaghodiya, District Vadodara, total admeasuring about 1,14,426 Sq. Meters, for a consideration of Rs.05.00 crores, out of which Rs.05.11 lakhs was paid in cash to said Kantilal and further amount of Rs.04.60 lakhs were paid on 31st December, 2011. The remaining amount was agreed to be paid within three years from the date of agreement. The total land, the subject matter of the agreement, was 42,55,030 Sq. Meters.;
(viii) It appears that in the F.S.L. Report dated 07th May, 2012 report prepared by the Director of Forensic Science Laboratory, permission letter dated 14th May, 2001 which was granted for sale of the land of the society was found to be fake;
(ix) Thereafter the F.I.R. in question bearing Crime Register No.I-05 of 2012 came to be registered in which these persons were shown as accused-(1) Kantilal Ambalal Patel, (2) Dolly Kantilal Patel, (3) Ashokbhai Desaibhai Patel, (4) Sachin Rajendrabhai Patel, (5) Haresh Shashikantbhai Patel, (6) Kishor N. Page 6 of 20 HC-NIC Page 6 of 20 Created On Tue Aug 15 16:09:23 IST 2017 R/CR.MA/8109/2017 ORDER Bhatt, (7) Jitendra Shashikant Patel, (8) Jashbhai Shashikantbhai Patel.
(x) Dolly Kantilal Patel, one of the accused shown in the F.I.R. came to be granted bail by this Court under Section 438, Cr.P.C. on 11th July, 2012;
(xi) Other accused-Vikas More and Bhanuben Kantilal Patel-came to be granted anticipatory bail by this Court in January, 2013;
(xii) Anticipatory bail of said Kantilal Ambalal Patel was rejected by the Sessions Court on 11th July, 2012;
(xiii) The Supreme Court by order dated 07th February, 2013 allowed bail to the said Kantilal. The order of the Apex Court reads as under.
"Heard learned counsel for the parties.
Leave granted.
Taking note of the submissions relating to the illness of the appellant supported by materials in the form of an affdiavit dated 04.02.2013 of his daughter and considering the fact that all the co-accused were released on bail and also taking note of the fact that the Investigating Officer has categorically stated that his presence is not required for further investigation, we are inclined to consider the claim of the appellant for grant of bail. Therefore, the appellant is ordered to be released on bail in connection with C.R. No.5/2012 registered at Gandhinagar Police Station, Economic Offence Cell, CID Crime, District Gandhinagar, Gujarat, to the satisfaction of Sessions Judge, Sessions Court at Ahmedabad The Sessions Judge is free to impose appropriate condition(s) as he deems fit."
(xiv) On 27th December, 2012 appeal was entertained by granting leave to appeal by this Court in which Page 7 of 20 HC-NIC Page 7 of 20 Created On Tue Aug 15 16:09:23 IST 2017 R/CR.MA/8109/2017 ORDER appeal challenge was to the aforementioned consent decree dated 13th May, 2005. However, by order dated 12th March, 2013, the Apex Court acting pursuant to Special Leave to Appeal (Civil) No.9347 of 2012, stayed the further proceedings of the First Appeals;
(xv) Apparently in continuation of the agreement to sell dated 31st December, 2011, a further Deed of Agreement came to be entered into between the applicant and the said Kantilal on 06th March, 2014. The said Deed stated that the actual price of the land in question was Rs.21.51 crores. Rs.05.00 crores were paid to said Kantilal. It was further stated in the Deed of Agreement that said Kantilal Patel would execute the sale deed in favour of the applicant within 45 days from the date of agreement;
(xvi) Kantilal Patel died on 07th March, 2014. Thereafter applicant made payment to the tune of Rs.64,42,687/- to the wife of Kantilal-Bhanuben. Cheque payments were made to Dolly Kantilal Patel;
(xvii) Applicant is stated to have paid stamp duty in respect of the properties in question being plot Nos.45,46,47,48,49 on 13th June, 2014. Similarly for land Plot Nos.50,51,52A,52B was also paid by the applicant. Stamp duty was paid by the applicant in respect of the consideration of Block No.54 as well as in respect of consideration agreed for land revenue survey Nos.320, 320/1, 329 and 332;
(xviii) The case of the applicant is that members of HUF of Kantilal Patel did not execute sale deed in his Page 8 of 20 HC-NIC Page 8 of 20 Created On Tue Aug 15 16:09:23 IST 2017 R/CR.MA/8109/2017 ORDER favour even though the applicant was present at the office of the Sub Registrar and had paid stamp duty which was in agreegate Rs.10,91,55,000/-;
(xix) Between 16th June, 2014 and 18th December, 2014, in all 25 cheques came to be issused by the applicant, which included 11 cheques in favour of Chayaben Kantilal Patel, 07 cheques in favour of Bhanuben Kantilal Patel and 07 cheques in favour of Dolly Kantilal Patel for the total amount of Rs.02,65,03,629/- in pursuant to the agreement to sell in question, however subsequently, applicant instructed the Bank for stop payment against the encashment of the cheques.
4. Learned senior counsel Mr.Anshin H. Desai for the applicant submitted that the applicant is falsely implicated in respect of the alleged offence who is resident of City of Vadodara and stays there with family. He is a bona fide purchaser, it was submitted. It was next submitted that the entire set of allegations are against Kantilal Ambalal Patel, who purchased the property of the housing society by committing serious irregularities. The present applicant who is a bona fide purchaser; he has always co-operated in the investigation after his name was shown in the supplementary chargesheet. He is a peace- loving and law-abiding bona fide citizen and there is no apprehension that he would run away or that he would not co-operate in the investigation. It was submitted that he even contested the municipal election, therefore the allegation that he is Page 9 of 20 HC-NIC Page 9 of 20 Created On Tue Aug 15 16:09:23 IST 2017 R/CR.MA/8109/2017 ORDER absconding is entirely incorrect.
4.1 It was next submitted that the applicant has paid huge amount to Kantilal Ambalal Patel and there is an agreement to sell in his favour, which is the basis of the suit of the applicant for specific performance already instituted and pending before the Civil Court at Vadodara. Leaned senior counsel submitted that in the facts of the case and when the applicant is available to the investigating agency, there is no need for arresting him. Leaned senior counsel also submitted that the applicant cannot be equated with said Kantilal Ambalal Patel as the applicant entered the picture as purchaser of the property only. Even otherwise, it was submitted that, said Kantilal Patel has been granted bail.
4.2 Learned senior counsel for the applicant relied on decision of this Court in case of Babubhai Somabhai Makwana v State of Gujarat being Criminal Miscellaneous Application No.2762 of 2014 decided on 17th July, 2014. In that case, offences were under Sections 406, 420, 465, 467, 468, 471 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code. While considering the case regarding anticipatory bail it was observed that the dispute was of civil nature and the investigation was based on documentary evidence, therefore plea for cancellation of bail was not sustainable. It was submitted by learned senior counsel that same attributes are present in this case. He next relied on decision of this Court in Patel Vishnubhai Shivrambhai v State of Gujarat [2004 (3) GLH 297] and Page 10 of 20 HC-NIC Page 10 of 20 Created On Tue Aug 15 16:09:23 IST 2017 R/CR.MA/8109/2017 ORDER further relied on another decision also of this Court in case of Rameshbhai Batubhai Dabhi v State of Gujarat [2011 (3) GLR 1999].
4.3 On the other hand, learned Additional Public Prosecutor relied on the papers which were made available to him by the investigating officer. By perusing copies of the statements recorded by the investigating officer as well as transcript of the telephonic conversation between one Mukeshbhai and the applicant, he harped that the role of the applicant clearly discernible and that the transcript reflected the criminal approach of the applicant in the entire affair.
4.4 Learned senior counsel Mr.Sanjanwala for the original complainant vehemently opposed the plea for grant of anticipatory bail. In addition to the reliance he also placed on the transcript of conversation which was part of the record before the Sessions Court, he raised all the contentions which are incorporated in the affidavit-in-reply filed on behalf of the complainant. He submitted that looking to the entire episode and the conduct of the applicant, knowledge of each and everything has to be attributed to him. He cannot be segregated, according to learned senior counsel, for his role played, from said Kantilal Patel. He submitted that at all material stages, criminal intention of the applicant was reflected. He submitted that permission given to the Registrar for sale of the land of the society was fake.
Page 11 of 20
HC-NIC Page 11 of 20 Created On Tue Aug 15 16:09:23 IST 2017
R/CR.MA/8109/2017 ORDER
4.5 He next submitted that the consent decree
was also collusive. He next submitted that petition by said Kantilal Ambalal Patel to quash the very F.I.R. was rejected. He submitted that Kantilal Patel was party and the applicant was in knowledge about the forgery which, according to learned senior counsel, was effected in respect of different documents. He relied on the order of this Court in Criminal Miscellaneous Application No.8353 of 2012 which was for quashment of F.I.R. filed by one of the accused Dollyben, in which in paragraph 11, the Court took note of various documents allegedly forged, to submit that all those facts has to be addressed for the conduct of the applicant also as he could be said to be in knowledge.
4.6 According to learned senior counsel, documents were not being parted with by the applicant and therefore, looking to his conduct there was a need of custodial interrogation and therefore, the case was not fit to grant anticipatory bail.
5. From the total scenario of the allegations in the F.I.R. and the facts and events in the backdrop detailed hereinabove, bring out the following aspects and features going to show the nature of the allegations and the nature of participation or role of the present applicant for which he is arraigned as an accused in the supplementary chargesheet, to be relevant for consideration of his plea for grant of anticipatory bail.
Page 12 of 20
HC-NIC Page 12 of 20 Created On Tue Aug 15 16:09:23 IST 2017
R/CR.MA/8109/2017 ORDER
(a) In the entire events in question in respect
of which the offences are alleged could be viewed in two parts-pre-2010 and post-2011. The allegations against the said Kantilal and other accused named in the F.I.R. are concerned relate to the misdeeds in purchasing lands of the society, in which the said Kantilal allegedly committed alleged acts of forging the documents. The present applicant was shown to be the Banakhat holder which was executed by said Kantilal on 31st December, 2011 for the lands. Apparently, applicant comes in picture with execution of said Banakhat;
(b) The applicant claims to be a bona fide purchaser. There is an agreement to sell in his favour. He has parted with earnest money and part of the sale consideration;
(c) Not only that, a civil suit is instituted by the applicant before the civil court for specific performance being Special Civil Suit No.523 of 2014 seeking to enforce the agreement to sell executed in his favour by said Kantilal. Total amount paid towards sale consideration by the applicant is, as averred in the complaint, Rs.07,34,96,371/-;
(d) Though the allegations are of hobnobbing by the applicant with Kantilal, the element of civil suit and the involvement in the civil type of transactions permeates and virtually dominates the nature of allegations;
Page 13 of 20
HC-NIC Page 13 of 20 Created On Tue Aug 15 16:09:23 IST 2017
R/CR.MA/8109/2017 ORDER
(e) During the years 2013 to 2016 several other
transactions of sale in form of registered sale deed came to be executed between the parties in which the applicant went before the office of Sub Registrar for execution of document etc. He made payments by cheques. It was submitted that bank statements of the applicant of HDFC Bank, Vaghodiya Road, Vadodara reflect the same.
5.1 The submission could be countenanced that the present applicant could not be placed for his involvement in the entire gamut of allegations, with same pedestal with that of said Kantibhai Patel. As already noticed, all the allegations of forgery effected while purchasing the lands of the society in the record of the society were directed against the said Kantibhai. It would not be proper in absence of any direct nexus to apply the very attributions to the present applicant. The role and the participation of the present applicant comes into picture in the second part of the seen where the applicant purchased the lands and agreement to sell dated 30th December, 2011 was executed in his favour by said Kantibhai. The transaction which the applicant entered into were civil in nature in which he paid the amount and has been litigating in the civil court to get the agreement to sell specifically executed. Even otherwise, said Kantibhai Patel has been granted by the Apex Court anticipatory bail as would be noticed, from the order of the Apex Court extracted hereinabove, the investigator made a statement before the Apex Court that no further investigation was Page 14 of 20 HC-NIC Page 14 of 20 Created On Tue Aug 15 16:09:23 IST 2017 R/CR.MA/8109/2017 ORDER necessary against said Kantibhai. When the investigating agency has so stated in respect of said Kantibhai, it could not be said that there is an imperative for custodial and coercive interrogation against the applicant.
5.2 Furthermore, mere circumstances which are capable of being viewed as attributes of acts in criminality, cannot be the sole ground to deny the anticipatory bail. The seriousness and the nature of allegations, attendant facts and host of other relevant considerations have to be taken into account for deciding about grant of anticipatory bail to the accused. The governing principle is that there must be a strong need for custodial interrogation. This is again with a rider that custodial interrogation cannot be a substitute for investigation to be carried out by the investigating agency. Denial of anticipatory bail should not operate as a pre-trial punishment. In the facts and circumstances of the present case, if the applicant is refused the anticipatory bail, it would certainly bring about a proposition for the applicant where he would be meted with a punishment of arrest before trial. The nature of allegations and the role attributed to him as is discernible from the cumulative reading of the allegations, the facts and the attendant circumstances of the matter, discretion goes in favour of the applicant.
5.3 It is also to be noted that the applicant was called by the investigating agency for the purpose of putting questions. He had remained present and gone Page 15 of 20 HC-NIC Page 15 of 20 Created On Tue Aug 15 16:09:23 IST 2017 R/CR.MA/8109/2017 ORDER to the investigating agency. Therefore, a definite tendency is shown by the applicant to co-operate with the investigation and learned senior counsel assured that he would continue to co-operate with the investigation in the same manner. The applicant present before the investigating officer during 2014- 15 and his statement was recorded. Affidavit was filed by the applicant on 01st September, 2015 in Criminal Revision Application No.342 of 2015 on the basis of which learned advocate for the applicant submitted that he was throughout available and present. Furthermore, the applicant was not shown as absconder nor warrant under Section 70, 82 or 83, Cr.P.C. has been issued against him.
5.4 This Court considered and applied the principles and parameters laid down by the Supreme Court in the decisions of Shri Gurbaksh Singh Sibbia v State of Punjab [(1980) 2 SCC 565] and Siddhram Stalingappa Mehtre v State of Maharashtra [(2011) 1 SCC 694] and applied them to the facts and circumstances operating in the present case.
5.5 It deserves to be noted that out of the different accused persons named in the F.I.R., the following accused persons have already been granted bail-(i) Kantilal Ambalal Patel was granted bail on 07th February, 2013 by the Apex Court; (ii) accused Vikas More and Bhanuben Kantilal Patel were granted anticipatory bail by this Court on 30th January, 2013 as per order passed in Criminal Miscellaneous Application No.1029 of 2013; (iii) accused Dollyben Page 16 of 20 HC-NIC Page 16 of 20 Created On Tue Aug 15 16:09:23 IST 2017 R/CR.MA/8109/2017 ORDER Kantilal Patel was granted bail on 11th July, 2012 under Section 439 as per order passed in Criminal Miscellaneous Application No.7680 of 2012; (iv) accused Nos.3,4,6 and 7 mentioned in column No.1 in the supplementary chargesheet are enlarged on anticipatory bail by this Court as per orders passed in Criminal Miscellaneous Application Nos.1029 of 2013, 1028 of 2013, 8433 of 2014 as well as 8434 of 2014 respectively; (v) accused Nos.5 and 8 in the said supplementary chargesheet came to be enlarged on anticipatory bail by the competent Sessions Court. Learned senior counsel for the applicant therefore pleaded parity for the applicant.
6. In the facts and circumstances obtained and for the reasons recorded above, personal liberty of the applicant-accused deserves to be accorded primacy over his forced arrest. The investigational needs could be balanced by imposing appropriate conditions to be observed by the applicant-accused including the condition of keeping the right of the police open to ask for remand of the applicant-accused, if required.
7. As a result of above facts and aspects, present application is allowed and it is directed that in the event of the applicant's arrest in connection with the F.I.R. bearing Crime Register No.I-05 of 2012 registered with Gandhinagar Zone Police Station, CID (Crime), Gandhinagar on 21st May, 2012, he shall be released forthwith on condition of his execution a personal bond of Rs.05,00,000/-(Rupees Five Lakhs Only) and further simultaneously furnishing solvent Page 17 of 20 HC-NIC Page 17 of 20 Created On Tue Aug 15 16:09:23 IST 2017 R/CR.MA/8109/2017 ORDER surety of the equivalent amount.
7.1 The anticipatory bail granted by this Court shall be further governed and regulated by the following conditions.
[i] The applicant shall cooperate with the investigation. He will make himself available for interrogation and for all investigative purposes whenever required;
[ii] The applicant shall not obstruct the process of investigation in any manner. He shall not directly or indirectly induce threat or extend promise to any witness so as to dissuade and prevent such witness from disclosing such facts as may be required, to the Court or Police Officer;
[iii] The applicant shall at the time of execution of bond, furnish full address of his residence and stay to the Investigating Officer as well as to the Court concerned. He shall not change the residence without prior intimation to the Court concerned during the pendency of the prosecution in the criminal case;
[iv] The applicant shall not travel beyond the territory of the State of Gujarat without prior permission of the Court concerned;
[v] The applicant shall surrender passport, if any he is holding, before the Court concerned immediately;
[vi] The applicant shall appear before the
Page 18 of 20
HC-NIC Page 18 of 20 Created On Tue Aug 15 16:09:23 IST 2017
R/CR.MA/8109/2017 ORDER
concerned Police Station on 11th May, 2017 between
11.00 am and 02.00 pm.
[vii] It shall remain open to the Investigating
Officer to seek and file application for remand of the applicant, if in his discretion he considers the asking for remand of the applicant to be just and proper for the purpose of investigational needs. If such application for remand is made by the Investigating Officer, the learned Magistrate concern would consider the same on merits without being influenced by the anticipatory bail granted.
8. It is clarified that despite this order, the investigating agency is not precluded from applying before the competent Magistrate for police remand of the applicant. It is further provided that the applicant shall remain present before the Magistrate concerned on the first day of such application, if made, and on all such subsequent occasions as may be directed by the learned Magistrate in such proceedings. This would be sufficient to treat the accused as in judicial custody for the purpose of entertaining the application for remand by the prosecution.
8.1 The liberty available to the prosecution to seek remand shall be without prejudice to the rights of the accused to contend against or to seek stay against the remand. It is further clarified that the applicant even if remanded to the police custody, after completion of the remand period; shall be set at liberty immediately, subject to other conditions of Page 19 of 20 HC-NIC Page 19 of 20 Created On Tue Aug 15 16:09:23 IST 2017 R/CR.MA/8109/2017 ORDER this anticipatory bail order, to be complied with.
8.2 It is clarified that the observations made in this order are for the purpose of granting pre- arrest protection only. It is further clarified that the trial court shall not be influenced by any of the observations made in this order and the same shall be treated for the purpose of dealing with the present application only.
9. The present application is allowed in the aforesaid terms. Rule is made absolute.
Direct service is permitted.
(N.V.ANJARIA, J.) Anup Page 20 of 20 HC-NIC Page 20 of 20 Created On Tue Aug 15 16:09:23 IST 2017