Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Gujarat High Court

State Of Gujarat vs Dilip Chhaganlal Kalal on 17 July, 2023

                                                                                 NEUTRAL CITATION




     R/CR.MA/18558/2020                            ORDER DATED: 17/07/2023

                                                                                 undefined




             IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

             R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION NO. 18558 of 2020

==========================================================
                             STATE OF GUJARAT
                                   Versus
                          DILIP CHHAGANLAL KALAL
==========================================================
Appearance:
MS MAITHILI MEHTA APP for the Applicant(s) No. 1
RULE SERVED for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================

 CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT M.
       PRACHCHHAK

                              Date : 17/07/2023

                               ORAL ORDER

1. This application is preferred under Section 439(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 by the applicant - State of Gujarat for cancellation of bail granted to the respondent herein by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Gandhinagar vide order dated 1.9.2020 passed in Criminal Misc. Application No.827 of 2020 for the offence punishable under Sections 65(A), 65(E), 81, 83, 98(2), 116-B etc. of the Prohibition Act in connection with the FIR No. 11216012200135 of 2020 before Rakhiyal Police Station.

2. Heard Ms. Maithili Mehta, learned APP for the applicant State of Gujarat. The rule is served on the respondent accused however, he has chosen not to appears before this Court.

NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/18558/2020 ORDER DATED: 17/07/2023 undefined

3. Learned APP for the State of Gujarat has produced on record the copy of the report dated 15.7.2007 of District Superintendent of Police, State Monitoring Cell, Gandhinagar and submitted that the accused has involved in two other offences, for which two FIR came to be registered against the accused.

4. I have perused the FIR and the impugned order passed by the Trial Court in the application for bail. I have considered the submissions canvassed by learned APP for the applicant State of Gujarat and the averments made in the application. The copy of report of District Superintendent of Police, State Monitoring Cell, Gandhinagar dated 15.7.2007 is taken on record.

5. It appears that the trial court, while granting bail vide order dated 1.9.2020 passed in Criminal Misc. Application No. 827 of 2020, imposed certain conditions and the accused has violated condition No.4 by not remaining present before the concerned Police Station. The said condition 4 of the order dated 1.9.2020 passed in Criminal Misc. Application No. 827 of 2020 reads as under:-

"4. The applicant shall remain present at the concerned police station on 05.09.2020 between 11.00 a.m. to 2.00 p.m. before the Investigating Officer of the above case and he shall co-operate with the investigation process and he shall make himself available for interrogation by Investigating Officer."

NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/18558/2020 ORDER DATED: 17/07/2023 undefined

6. Further, as per report dated 15.7.2007 of the District Superintendent of Police, State Monitoring Cell, Gandhinagar the accused has involved in other two similar offences which reads as under:-

"(1) FIR No. 111910112001374 of 2020 dated 23.9.2020 registered before the D.C.B. Police Station, Ahmedabad City.

(2) FIR No. 0963 of 2022 dated 31.07.2022 registered before the Idar Police Station, Sabarkantha."

7. It was pointed out by the learned APP before this Court that the respondent accused has never remained present before the trial court during the trial and has committed breach of conditions imposed by the trial court, and even after granting bail, the respondent accused has committed another two similar offences. However, though this fact was brought to the notice of the trial court, the trial court had not considered all these aspects and granted bail to the respondent accused. Moreover, in the present proceedings also, the rule was issued by this Court, but the respondent accused chosen not to remain present before this Court. It seems that after releasing on bail, the respondent accused has not co-operated with the investigation and also not present personally before the trial court.

8. The ratio laid down by the Apex Court in the catena of decisions that the accused granted bail and entitled to Page 3 of 5 Downloaded on : Sat Sep 16 21:40:51 IST 2023 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/18558/2020 ORDER DATED: 17/07/2023 undefined liberty if he is not co-operating with the investigating agency or not remaining present and flouting the conditions imposed upon him while granting bail, then in that case, he is not entitled for any leniency and in that circumstances, the bail is required to be cancelled. The reported decisions of the Apex Court in this regard are summarized as under :

[1] CBI versus Santosh Karnani and Anr., reported in 2023 SCC OnLine SC 427;

[2] Deepak Yadav versus State of UP and Anr., reported in [2022] 8 SCC 559;

[3] Kamla Devi versus State of Rajasthan and Anr., reported in [2022] 6 SCC 725;

[4] Manoj Kumar Khokhar versus State of Rajasthan and Anr., reported in [2022] 3 SCC 501; [5] Brijmani Devi versus Pappu Kumar and Anr., reported in [2022] 4 SCC 497;

[6] Supreme Bhiwandi Wada Manor Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd versus State of Maharashtra and Anr., reported in [2021] 8 SCC 753;

[7] Nathu Singh versus State of UP and Ors., reported in [2021] 6 SCC 64;

[8] Jitendra Taneja versus State of UP and ors., reported in [2021] 5 SCC 308; and [9] Union of India versus K.A. Najeeb, reported in [2021] 3 SCC 713.

9. Considering the seriousness of the crime and Page 4 of 5 Downloaded on : Sat Sep 16 21:40:51 IST 2023 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/18558/2020 ORDER DATED: 17/07/2023 undefined keeping in mind the criminal antecedents of the accused, the possibility of tampering with the evidence cannot be ruled out which eventually would have a material bearing on the quality of justice. Further the accused has misused the liberty granted by the Trial Court. In view of aforesaid facts, request of cancellation of bail granted to the accused is acceded to.

10. For the foregoing reasons and in view of the decisions of the Apex Court as aforesaid, I am of the opinion that the present application deserves to be allowed and it is hereby allowed. The impugned order dated 1.9.2020 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Gandhinagar in Criminal Misc. Application No.827 of 2020 is hereby quashed and set aside. The bail stands cancelled. The Investigating Officer is at liberty to approach the concerned Sessions Court for issuance of non-bailable warrant and if warrant is already issued against the accused person then the Investigating Officer shall take appropriate action for execution of the warrant issued by the Trial Court in accordance with law or take action under Section 72 of Code declaring the concerned accused as absconder. Rule is made absolute.

(HEMANT M. PRACHCHHAK,J) SURESH SOLANKI Page 5 of 5 Downloaded on : Sat Sep 16 21:40:51 IST 2023