Gujarat High Court
Mohanlal vs State on 20 May, 2008
Author: R.H.Shukla
Bench: R.H.Shukla
CR.MA/6581/2008 1/ 5 ORDER IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION No. 6581 of 2008 ========================================================= MOHANLAL BHAGWANJI GARIA & 1 - Applicant(s) Versus STATE OF GUJARAT - Respondent(s) ========================================================= Appearance : MR ASHISH M DAGLI for Applicant(s) : 1 - 2. MR ASHISH DESAI, ADDL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for Respondent(s) : 1, ========================================================= CORAM : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.H.SHUKLA Date : 20/05/2008 ORAL ORDER
1. Rule.
Mr Ashish Desai, learned APP waives service of Notice of Rule on behalf of the respondent-State.
2. This application is filed by the applicants under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 apprehending arrest pursuant to C.R. No. II-3010 of 2008 before Bantwa Police Station for the offences alleged under section 498A, 114 read with section 306 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. Heard learned advocate Mr. Ashish Dagli for the applicants and Mr. Ashish Desai, learned APP for the State. The facts and circumstances stated are that the applicants are the father-in-law and mother-in-law of the deceased complainant who committed suicide for which the aforesaid case has been registered. The complaint/FIR has also been produced at Annexure 'A'.
4. Mr Ashish Dagli, learned advocate appearing for the applicants has stated that the applicant no.1 is suffering from paralysis and is not even able to do his routine activity without assistance of somebody.
He has submitted that similarly the applicant no.2 is also aged lady. Referring to the complaint he has stated that the deceased has admittedly committed suicide and that the applicants are residing separately.
5. Mr Desai, learned APP has submitted that the FIR filed merely suggests that it is due to the applicants that the deceased was driven to commit suicide and therefore in such cases anticipatory bail may not be granted.
6. Heard learned counsel for the parties. I have perused the FIR and considered the rival submissions. This court is not required to consider the merits of the case keeping in view the guidelines laid down by the Honourable the Apex Court in the judgement reported in AIR 2007 SC 1450 expressing word of caution that normally discretionary relief may not be exercised once prima facie case is shown and these powers under section 438 are extraordinary. However, in view of the peculiar facts and circumstances where the applicant no.1 is suffering from paralysis and where applicant no.2 is also aged about 70 years and when admittedly they have been residing separately, the custodial interrogation would not be required and more particularly when the applicants are aged persons, this application requires to be allowed. In the facts and circumstances of the case, the application is allowed.
7. In the event of the arrest of the applicants in Crime Register No. II-3010 of 2008, they shall be released on bail in respect of the offence alleged against them on their executing a bond of Rs. 5000/- (Rupees Five thousand only) each with one solvent surety of the like amount by the concerned Police Officer and on conditions that they shall;
(a) As the applicants are required to surrender or make themselves available before the Investigating Officer, however, in view of the condition of the applicant no.1 who is suffering from paralysis and applicant no.2 who is an aged lady, the I.O or his representative may visit the house of the applicants and record the statements as regards surrender to avoid any technicalities.
(b) remain present before the trial Court regularly if and when directed on the dates fixed;
(c) make themselves available for interrogation by the Police Officer whenever and wherever required;
(d) not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the fact of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any Police Officer;
(e) not obstruct or hamper the police investigation and not play mischief with the evidence collected or yet to be collected by the police;
(f) at the time of execution of bond, furnish the address to the Investigating Officer and the Courts concerned, and shall not change their residence till the final disposal of the case or till further orders;
(g) not leave India without the permission of the Court and if having passport, shall deposit the same before the trial Court within a week.
(h) It would be open to the investigation officer to file an application or remand if he considers it proper and just and the learned Magistrate would decide it on merits.
8. This order will hold good if the applicants are arrested at any time within 90 days from today. The order for release on bail will remain operative only for a period of ten days from the date of their arrest. Thereafter, it will be open to the applicants to make a fresh application for being enlarged on bail in usual course which, when it comes before the competent Court will be disposed of in accordance with law, having regard to all the attendant circumstances and the materials available at the relevant time uninfluenced by the fact that anticipatory bail was granted by this Court to the applicants.
9. Rule is made absolute. Direct service is permitted.
[R. H. Shukla, J.] Divya//