Gujarat High Court
Sandeep Omprakash Goyal vs State Of Gujarat on 9 March, 2017
Author: N.V.Anjaria
Bench: N.V.Anjaria
R/CR.MA/5693/2017 ORDER
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL ) NO. 5693 of
2017
==========================================================
SANDEEP OMPRAKASH GOYAL....Applicant(s)
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT....Respondent(s)
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR NIKHIL S KARIEL, ADVOCATE for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR. L. B. DABHI, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.V.ANJARIA
Date : 09/03/2017
ORAL ORDER
In the facts and circumstances of the case, Rule returnable forthwith. Learned Assistant Public Prosecutor Mr. L. B. Dabhi waives service of notice of Rule on behalf of the respondent state.
1.1 With the consent of learned advocates for the parties, the application is taken up for final consideration.
2. It is in connection with the First Information Report dated 09.12.2016 bearing Crime Register No. I-57 of 2016 registered with Kandla Marine police station, for the alleged offences under sections 420, 407 and 114 of Indian Penal Code, 1860, that the present application under section 438 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, presented before this court by the applicant accused.
Page 1 of 6
HC-NIC Page 1 of 6 Created On Fri Mar 10 00:32:32 IST 2017
R/CR.MA/5693/2017 ORDER
3. The complainant was a security manager of the company, who received a phone call that a truck had arrived wherein quantity of U.S. Coal was carried, which was beyond permissible limit and greater than the permissible quantity. It was on 14.12.2015 that the said incident stated to have been taken place. Upon weighment being made, the truck was found with over-loaded with coal. It was therefore alleged that the U.S. Coal in large quantity was being siphoned off to be sold at a different place than it was destined under the transportation. The FIR mentioned three persons.
4. Heard learned advocate Mr. Nikhil Kariel for the applicant and learned Assistant Public Prosecutor Mr. L. B. Dabhi for the respondent state. Learned APP opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail on the basis of the investigation papers available with from the office of investigating officer. The same were also made available to the court for perusal.
5. As in the facts and circumstances of the case, the court was inclined to exercise the discretion to grant anticipatory bail, learned advocates for the parties submitted that they would not be inviting a reasoned order.
5.1 Having considered the allegations and the nature thereof in the FIR and the role played by the applicant in the total context, and considering aspect that the applicant through his learned advocate has assured co-operation in the Page 2 of 6 HC-NIC Page 2 of 6 Created On Fri Mar 10 00:32:32 IST 2017 R/CR.MA/5693/2017 ORDER investigation, it could be possible to accord primacy over forcing his arrest. The interests of the investigation could be balanced and could be protected by imposing appropriate conditions on the applicant for enjoying the protection against arrest.
6. In the circumstances therefore, it is directed that in the event of applicant's arrest in connection with the First Information Report dated 09.12.2016 bearing Crime Register No. I-57 of 2016 registered with Kandla Marine police station, the applicant shall be released forthwith on condition of execution of personal bond of Rs. 25,000/-.
7. The anticipatory bail granted by this order, 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
Page 3 of 6
HC-NIC Page 3 of 6 Created On Fri Mar 10 00:32:32 IST 2017
R/CR.MA/5693/2017 ORDER
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 remain present at the Police Station concerned on 14th March, 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.
Page 4 of 6
HC-NIC Page 4 of 6 Created On Fri Mar 10 00:32:32 IST 2017
R/CR.MA/5693/2017 ORDER
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.
8.1 This would be sufficient to treat the accused as in judicial custody for the purpose of entertaining the application for remand by the prosecution. This 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 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 above purpose only.
9. The present application is allowed in the aforesaid terms. Rule is made absolute.
Page 5 of 6 HC-NIC Page 5 of 6 Created On Fri Mar 10 00:32:32 IST 2017 R/CR.MA/5693/2017 ORDER Direct service is permitted. (N.V.ANJARIA, J.) cmjoshi Page 6 of 6 HC-NIC Page 6 of 6 Created On Fri Mar 10 00:32:32 IST 2017