Ramjibhai Popatbhai Kachhadia vs State Of Gujarat on 8 January, 2015

[Cites 8, Cited by 1]

Gujarat High Court

Ramjibhai Popatbhai Kachhadia vs State Of Gujarat on 8 January, 2015

Bench: J.B.Pardiwala

           R/CR.MA/50/2015                                           ORDER




           IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

 CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL ) NO. 50 of
                                        2015

================================================================
              RAMJIBHAI POPATBHAI KACHHADIA....Applicant(s)
                               Versus
                   STATE OF GUJARAT....Respondent(s)
================================================================
Appearance:
MR P P MAJMUDAR, ADVOCATE for the Applicant(s) No. 1
Learned A.P.P., for the Respondent(s) No. 1
================================================================

          CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE J.B.PARDIWALA

                                 Date : 08/01/2015


                                   ORAL ORDER

1. RULE. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor waives service of Rule on behalf of the respondent State of Gujarat.

2. By way of the this application under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, the applicant-original accused has prayed to release him on anticipatory bail in the event of his arrest in connection with the FIR being C.R.No.I61of 2014 registered with Sarthana Police Station, Surat for the offences punishable under Sections 406, 420, 465, 467, 468 and 471 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.

3. The learned advocate appearing on behalf of the applicant would submit that considering the nature of offence, the applicant may be enlarged on anticipatory bail by imposing suitable conditions.

4. On the other hand, the learned A.P.P. appearing for the Page 1 of 4 R/CR.MA/50/2015 ORDER respondentState has opposed this application and granting anticipatory bail to the applicant looking to the nature and gravity of the offence.

5. I have heard the learned advocates appearing for the respective parties, perused the investigation papers and have also taken into consideration the facts of the case, nature of allegations, role attributed to the applicantaccused and without discussing the evidence in detail, at this stage, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the applicant. This court has also taken into consideration the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Siddharam Satlinqappa Mhetre Vs. State of Maharashtra and Ors. as reported at (2011) 1 SCC 6941, wherein the Hon'ble Apex Court reiterated the law laid down by the Constitution Bench in the case of Shri Gurubaksh Singh Sibbis & Ors., as reported at (1980) 2 SCC 665.

6. The learned Advocate for the applicant on instructions states that the applicant is ready and willing to abide by all the conditions, including impositions of conditions with regard to the powers of Investigating Agency to file an application before the competent court for his remand. He further submit that upon filing of such application by the Investigating Agency, the right of applicant accused to oppose such application on merits may be kept open.

7. In the result, the present application is allowed by directing that in the event of applicant herein being arrested pursuant to FIR registered at C.R.No.I61of 2014 registered with Sarthana Police Station, Surat, the applicant shall be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond of Rs.10,000/ (Rupees Ten Thousands only) with one surety of like amount, on the following conditions:

(a) shall cooperate with the investigation and make himself Page 2 of 4 R/CR.MA/50/2015 ORDER available for interrogation whenever required;

(b) the applicant shall remain present before the Investigating Officer of the concerned Police Station on 15/01/2015 between 11:00 a.m. and 2:00 p.m.;

(c) shall 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;

(d) shall not obstruct or hamper the police investigation and not to play mischief with the evidence collected or yet to be collected by the Police;

(e) shall at the time of execution of bond, furnish the address to the Investigating Officer and the Court concerned and shall not change his residence till the final disposal of the case or till further orders;

(f) shall not leave India without the permission of the Court and, if having passports shall surrender the same before the Trial Court within a week.

(g) it would be open to the Investigating Officer to file an application for remand if he considers it proper and just and the learned Magistrate would decide the same on merits;

8. Despite this order, it would be open for the Investigating Agency to apply to the competent Magistrate, for police remand of the applicant. The applicant shall remain present before the learned Magistrate on the first date of hearing of such application on all subsequent occasions, as may be directed by the learned Magistrate. This would be sufficient to treat the accused in the judicial custody for the purpose of entertaining application of the prosecution for police remand. This is, however, without prejudice to the right of the accused to seek stay against an order of remand, if, ultimately, granted, and the power of the learned Magistrate to consider such a request in accordance with law. It is Page 3 of 4 R/CR.MA/50/2015 ORDER clarified that the applicant, even if, remanded to the police custody, upon completion of such period of police remand, shall be set free immediately, subject to other conditions of this anticipatory bail order.

9. At the trial, the Trial Court shall not be influenced by the prima facie observations made by this Court while enlarging the applicant on bail.

10. Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent. The present application is disposed of accordingly. Direct service is permitted.

(J.B.PARDIWALA, J.) ali Page 4 of 4

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Gujarat High Court