Bhupatbhai Bachubhai Nayak vs State Of Gujarat on 29 October, 2020

[Cites 6, Cited by 0]

Gujarat High Court

Bhupatbhai Bachubhai Nayak vs State Of Gujarat on 29 October, 2020

Bench: Gita Gopi

       R/CR.MA/12706/2020                                  ORDER




         IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

         R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION NO. 12706 of 2020

==========================================================
                     BHUPATBHAI BACHUBHAI NAYAK
                                Versus
                          STATE OF GUJARAT
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR PADMRAJ K JADEJA(2095) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR UM SHASTRI(830) for the Respondent(s) No. 1
MR PRANAV TRIVEDI APP(2) for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================

 CORAM: HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE GITA GOPI

                            Date : 29/10/2020

                             ORAL ORDER

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

2. This application has been filed under section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for regular bail in connection with the FIR being I-C.R. No.I-28 of 2013 registered with Dhanpur Police Station, for offences punishable under sections 366, 376, 323, 506(2) and 114 of IPC.

3. Mr. Padmraj K. Jadeja, learned advocate for the applicant, referring to the Agreement of Marriage executed before the notary, submitted that the allegation against the complainant is concocted and the complainant has married with one co-accused Narpatbhai Maheshbhai Nayak in the year 2002 and when Maheshbhai Maganbhai Bhlodiya had filed a complaint on 05.12.2012 against the present complianant's father, brother and relatives, to exert pressure, the complaint has been filed to Page 1 of 3 Downloaded on : Fri Oct 30 05:51:34 IST 2020 R/CR.MA/12706/2020 ORDER counter. It was, therefore, prayed that the present application may be allowed and the applicant herein may also be released on regular bail.

4. Mr. Pranav Trivedi, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, assisted by Mr. U.M. Shastri, learned advocate for the original complainant, submitted that the allegation is of rape by the complainant and the contents of the FIR shows that all the accused have forcibly taken the complainant and locked her in the farm and the alleged offence has been committed. It was, therefore, prayed that no discretion may be exercised in favour of the applicant.

5. Heard learned advocates on both the sides and perused the material on record. Taking the fact of the Agreement of Marriage executed before the notary on 23.02.2013 coupled with the FIR filed by Maheshbhai Maganbhai Bhlodiya dated 05.12.2012, this Court finds this to be a fit case where discretion could be exercised in favour of the applicant.

6. Hence, the present application is allowed. The applicant is ordered to be released on regular bail in connection with FIR being I-C.R. No.I-28 of 2013 registered with Dhanpur Police Station on executing a personal bond of Rs.15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Thousand 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 injurious to the interest of the prosecution;

Page 2 of 3 Downloaded on : Fri Oct 30 05:51:34 IST 2020

            R/CR.MA/12706/2020                                           ORDER



[c]       surrender passport, if any, to the lower court within a
week;
[d]       not leave India without prior permission of the concerned
trial court;
[e]       furnish     the       present      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 the concerned trial court;

7. The authorities shall adhere to its own Circular relating to COVID-19 and, thereafter, 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.

8. Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent. Direct service is permitted. Registry to communicate this order to the concerned Court/authority by Fax or Email forthwith.

(GITA GOPI,J) Pallavi Page 3 of 3 Downloaded on : Fri Oct 30 05:51:34 IST 2020

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Gujarat High Court