Gujarat High Court
Upendranath Godabarish Mishra vs State Of Gujarat on 8 July, 2016
Author: Paresh Upadhyay
Bench: Paresh Upadhyay
R/CR.MA/5716/2016 ORDER
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL ) NO. 5716 of
2016
============================================================
====
UPENDRANATH GODABARISH MISHRA ....Applicant
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT ....Respondent
===============================================================
Appearance:
MR S.I. NANAVATI, SR. ADVOCATE with
MRS VD NANAVATI, ADVOCATE for the Applicant
MS. MONALI BHATT, APP for the Respondent State
MR DHRUV K DAVE, ADVOCATE for the complainant
===============================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE PARESH UPADHYAY
Date : 08/07/2016
ORAL ORDER
1. This is an application for anticipatory bail.
2. The applicant is one of the accused named in C.R.-I No. 11 of 2015 registered with the Surat D.C.B. Police Station, District : Surat for the offences punishable under Sections 406, 409, 420, 120B & 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Sections 4,5 & 6 of the Prize Chits & Money Circulation Schemes (Banning) Act, 1978.
3. Learned advocate for the applicant has taken this Court through the contents of the complaint and the nature of the Page 1 of 3 HC-NIC Page 1 of 3 Created On Tue Jul 12 02:10:07 IST 2016 R/CR.MA/5716/2016 ORDER allegations against the applicant and attaining circumstances. It is submitted that custodial interrogation of the applicant is not required and considering the totality the applicant may be granted anticipatory bail.
4. On the other hand, learned Additional Public Prosecutor has contested this application and has opposed the grant of anticipatory bail. The investigation papers are also available to this Court. It is further submitted that the applicant and his other family members are facing similar allegations in number of other offences. It is also submitted that the competent court has also issued warrant of arrest against the present applicant on 20.02.2016. It is submitted that this application be dismissed.
5. Learned advocate for the complainant has also opposed this application.
6. Having heard learned advocates for the respective parties and having gone through the material on record, and which is made available to the Court by learned Additional Public Prosecutor, this Court finds that, number of poor persons prima facie are cheated by the companies where the applicant and his family members are Directors and it has inter-state connections. This Court further finds that in the facts of the case, the insistence of the prosecution for custodial interrogation of the applicant is justified. Under the circumstances grant of anticipatory bail to the applicant would obstruct the investigation. This application therefore needs to be dismissed.
Page 2 of 3
HC-NIC Page 2 of 3 Created On Tue Jul 12 02:10:07 IST 2016
R/CR.MA/5716/2016 ORDER
7. For the reasons recorded above, this application is dismissed. Rule discharged.
(PARESH UPADHYAY, J.) Amit/9 Page 3 of 3 HC-NIC Page 3 of 3 Created On Tue Jul 12 02:10:07 IST 2016