Gujarat High Court
Vijaybhai Haribhai Tank vs State Of Gujarat on 17 June, 2021
Author: A. S. Supehia
Bench: A.S. Supehia
R/CR.MA/2903/2021 ORDER DATED: 17/06/2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION NO. 2903 of 2021
==========================================================
VIJAYBHAI HARIBHAI TANK
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR MOUSAM R YAGNIK(3689) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR NIRAD D BUCH(4000) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR HIMANSHU K PATEL, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.S. SUPEHIA
Date : 17/06/2021
ORAL ORDER
1. The present application has been filed seeking bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Cr.P.C.) in connection with F.I.R. being C.R. No.11192011210054 of 2021 registered with Bopal Police Station, Dist.Ahmedabad for the offences punishable under Sections 365, 394 and 114 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC).
2. The case of the prosecution in brief is that on 13.01.2021, the accused No.3 called the first informant to meet at Ashapura Hotel, where accused Nos.2 and 3 were already present and as the first informant had given an amount of Rs.70,000/- to the accused No.2, he asked for repayment of the same from the accused No.2. Thereafter, it is alleged that the applicant came there in his car and forced him to sit in his car. It is further alleged that the applicant stopped the car near Adalaj Crossroads at one farm and the applicant and the co-accused assaulted him with fist and stick blows and looted a sum of Rs.17,000/- from him. It is also alleged that, the first informed was forced to confess about him having borrowed a sum of Rs.5,0,000/- with interest from the applicant.
Page 1 of 6 Downloaded on : Fri Sep 03 01:14:36 IST 2021R/CR.MA/2903/2021 ORDER DATED: 17/06/2021
3. Learned advocate appearing for the applicant at the outset has submitted that the applicant is falsely implicated in the offence since he is running a news channel namely, Network News Channel from Gandhinagar and he had aired some news item against the State Government and thereafter, with a purpose to see that the applicant does not attend his office and air his news channel, he has been falsely implicated in the alleged crime. He has submitted that pursuant to the airing of the news item of the State Government, the license of the news channel was cancelled by the State Government which was the subject matter of challenge before this court in Special Civil Application No.7101 of 2020. It is submitted that ultimately the Division bench of this court has remanded the matter to the State Government for reconsideration. He has further submitted that the co-accused i.e. accused Nos.2 and 4 have been enlarged on regular bail by this court and hence, on the ground of parity, the applicant may also be released on anticipatory bail. Learned advocate has requested for some time in order to produce the order passed by this court with regard to his offence. The same is refused as this Court has perused the same. He has further submitted that the applicant was not issued any notice or summons calling upon him to cooperate in the investigation. Thus, it is urged that the present application may be allowed.
4. Vehemently, opposing the present application, learned Additional Public Prosecutor has submitted that in fact there are four (4) antecedents against the applicant. He has submitted that the car of the applicant was used for committing the offence. He has further submitted that the applicant had in fact forced the complainant to sit in his car and thereafter, he was abducted and taken to other place, where he was beaten in the car and the amount of Rs.17,000/- was taken from his pocket. He has further Page 2 of 6 Downloaded on : Fri Sep 03 01:14:36 IST 2021 R/CR.MA/2903/2021 ORDER DATED: 17/06/2021 submitted that in fact the applicant has misused his liberty as he was granted anticipatory bail in other offences punishable under sections 379, 406, 465, 471, 473, 120B and 114 of the IPC vide order dated 09.01.2015 passed by this Court in Criminal Misc. Application No.557 of 2015. It is submitted by him that in other offences also under sections 327, 442, 504 and 506(2) of the IPC, the applicant was granted anticipatory bail but he has misused his liberty. He has further submitted that the applicant's car is also captured in the CCTV footage in Bopal area and that is also a part of the report of the investigation. It is further submitted that in another offence being C.R.No.11201001200004 of 2020 registered on 16.09.2020 with the CID Crime Branch Police Station, this court vide order dated 10.11.2020 passed in Criminal Misc. Application No.15537 of 2020 in fact has protected the applicant but he has again committed the offence and hence, the application may be rejected. While pressing the report of the investigating officer, he has submitted that the investigating officer has went at various places i.e. Shihor, Gandhinagar and at his office, but he was not traceable. He has submitted that the applicant is arraigned as the accused No.1 and he was supposed to cooperate with the investigation and remain present but the applicant has not chosen to.
5. Heard the learned advocates for the respective parties and also perused the documents on record.
6. The contents of the F.I.R. reveal that the applicant is the prime accused in committing the offence and he has used his car having registration No.GJ-27-CF-1 for abducting the complainant and the applicant was the one, who had forced the complainant to sit in the car and thereafter, the complainant was assaulted and the amount of Rs.17,000/- was also looted from the complainant. It is Page 3 of 6 Downloaded on : Fri Sep 03 01:14:36 IST 2021 R/CR.MA/2903/2021 ORDER DATED: 17/06/2021 also alleged that the applicant has forced to confess about borrowing an amount of Rs.5,00,000/- with interest from the applicant.
7. Before adverting the submissions made by the learned advocates for the respective parties, it would be apposite to notice the antecedents of the applicant and the orders passed granting bail in such offences. The applicant is facing following offences:
(i) F.I.R. being C.R.No.-I-54 of 2014 registered with Navrangpura Police Station, Ahmedabad City, Dist.
Ahmedabad for the offences punishable under sections 406, 420, 465, 467, 468, 471 and 120B of the IPC, wherein the applicant is released on regular bail as per the statement made by the learned advocate for the applicant;
(ii) F.I.R. being C.R.No.-I-186 of 2018 registered with Sector 7 Police Station, Dist. Gandhinagar for the offences punishable under Sections 323, 452, 504, 506(2) and 114 of the IPC, wherein the applicant is granted anticipatory bail by the trial court vide order dated 26.07.2018 passed in Criminal Misc. Application No.1180 of 2018;
(iii) F.I.R. being C.R.No.-I-06 of 2014 registered with Salthana Police Station, Dist.Surat for the offences punishable under section 379 of the IPC, wherein the applicant is released on anticipatory bail by the Sessions Court vide order dated 09.01.2015 passed in Criminal Misc. Application No.557 of 2015;
(iv) F.I.R. being C.R.No.11201001200004 of 2020 registered on 16.07.2020 with CID Crime Branch, Gandhinagar for the Page 4 of 6 Downloaded on : Fri Sep 03 01:14:36 IST 2021 R/CR.MA/2903/2021 ORDER DATED: 17/06/2021 punishable under Sections 406, 419, 420, 170 and 120B of the IPC, wherein this Court vide order dated 10.11.2020 passed in Criminal Misc. Application No.15537 of 2020 had ordered not to take coercive steps against the applicant.
8. The applicant is released on bail by imposing various conditions one of which is that he shall maintain law and order. After obtaining aforesaid orders of anticipatory bail as noted hereinabove, including last order dated 10.11.2020 passed by this Court in Criminal Misc. Application No.15537 of 2020, the applicant has again indulged himself in the aforesaid offences. Thus, indubitably it can be safely assumed that the applicant has misused his liberty.
9. This Court has also taken into consideration the law declared by the Apex Court in the case of Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre vs State of Maharashtra, A.I.R. 2011 S.C. 312. One of the parameters prescribed by the Apex Court is the possibility of the accused likelihood to repeat similar offence or other offences. The complicity of the applicant in the offence is very serious. The applicant seems to be habitual offender. The Court is declining the request made by the learned advocate Mr.Buch seeking adjournment for producing the orders passed in writ petition filed by the applicant challenging his cancellation of license. This Court has perused the interim order dated 23.06.2020 passed in Special Civil Application No.7101 of 2020 passed by the coordinate bench of this Court. By the interim order, the Coordinate Bench of this Court had passed the interim order in favour of the applicant which was subject matter of challenge before the Division Bench of this Court being Letters Patent Appeal No.402 of 2020, wherein vide order dated 10.09.2020, the Division Bench of this Court has disposed of the LPA by setting aside the order passed by the Page 5 of 6 Downloaded on : Fri Sep 03 01:14:36 IST 2021 R/CR.MA/2903/2021 ORDER DATED: 17/06/2021 Coordinate Bench of this Court on 23.06.2020 and also by quashing the order dated 07.05.2020 passed by the Collector, Gandhinagar and further, the Collector is directed to proceed to pass appropriate orders in accordance with law with regard to the renewal of the license of the news network run by the applicant. In the considered opinion of this Court, the said orders would not have any bearing on the offence registered against the applicant in the F.I.R.
10. For the foregoing reasons, this Court does not find the applicant worthy of bail under section 438 of the Cr.P.C. hence, the present application stands rejected. RULE is discharged.
Sd/- .
(A. S. SUPEHIA, J)
NVMEWADA
Page 6 of 6
Downloaded on : Fri Sep 03 01:14:36 IST 2021