Gujarat High Court
Dhuliben vs State on 4 February, 2010
Author: H.B.Antani
Bench: H.B.Antani
Gujarat High Court Case Information System
Print
CR.MA/516/2010 1/ 4 ORDER
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
CRIMINAL
MISC.APPLICATION No. 516 of
2010
=========================================================
DHULIBEN
SAVABHAI MALIVAD - Applicant(s)
Versus
STATE
OF GUJARAT - Respondent(s)
=========================================================
Appearance
:
MR PM DAVE
for Applicant(s) : 1,
MR.
U.A. TRIVEDI, APP for Respondent(s) :
1,
=========================================================
CORAM
:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE H.B.ANTANI
Date
: 04/02/2010
ORAL
ORDER
1. This is an application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, by the applicant, who apprehends her arrest, in connection with the FIR bearing CR No. I 60 of 2009 registered with Khanpur Police Station for the offence punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 435, 436, 395, 120 (B), 342, 307, 429 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 135 of the Bombay Police Act.
2. Learned advocate for the applicant submitted that the applicant is an innocent lady and she has been falsely implicated in the alleged commission of offence punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 435, 436, 395, 120 (B), 342, 307, 429 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 135 of the Bombay Police Act. Learned advocate submitted that the applicant has not committed any crime as alleged in the F.I.R. On bare perusal of the F.I.R., the applicant did not participate in the alleged offence and she was merely present at the site of the offence along with other accused. Considering the aforesaid aspect, the prayer, as set out in the application, be granted.
3. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor Mr. U.A. Trivedi representing the State, while opposing the bail application, submitted that considering the fact that the applicant is involved in the commission of offence punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 435, 436, 395, 120 (B), 342, 307, 429 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 135 of the Bombay Police Act and the role attributed to the applicant which is reflected in the F.I.R. at Annexure-A to the application, no discretionary relief be granted to the applicant and application deserves to be rejected.
4. Having considered the rival submissions and on perusal of the F.I.R. at Annexure-A to the application, role attributed to the applicant and since the applicant was standing at the scene of offence along with other accused, no overt act can be said to have been alleged against her. In view of the above facts and circumstances of the case and without entering into merits of the case, I am of the view that the prayer, as prayed for, in the application is required to be granted.
5. In the event of arrest of the applicant in connection with FIR bearing CR No. I 60 of 2009 registered with Khanpur Police Station for the offence punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 435, 436, 395, 120 (B), 342, 307, 429 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 135 of the Bombay Police Act, she shall be released on bail on executing a bond of Rs.10,000/- [Rupees ten thousand only] with one surety of the like amount on the following conditions that she shall:
[a] co-operate with the investigation and make herself available for interrogation whenever required.
[b] shall remain present at the concerned Police Station on 11.02.2010 between 9.00 AM to 3.00 PM.
[c] shall not hamper the investigation in any manner nor shall directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer;
[d] at the time of execution of bond, furnish her residential address to the investigating officer and the Court concerned and shall not change the residence till the final disposal of the case or till further orders;
[e] not leave India without the permission of the Court and, if holding a passport, she shall surrender the same before the Trial Court within a week;
[f] not obstruct or hamper the police investigation and not play mischief with the evidence collected or yet to be collected by the police;
6. It would be open to the Investigating Officer to file an application for remand if he considers it proper and just; and the competent Court would decide it on merits.
7. This order will hold good, if the applicant is arrested at any time within 90 days from today. The order for release on bail will remain operative only for a period of ten days from the date of her arrest. Thereafter, it will be open to the applicant to make a fresh application for being enlarged on bail in usual course, which, when it comes up before the competent Court, will be decided in accordance with law, having regard to all the attending circumstances and the materials available at the relevant time, without being influenced by the fact that anticipatory bail was granted.
8. With these directions, this application is allowed.
9. Rule is made absolute. Direct Service is permitted.
[H.B. Antani, J.] Shekhar Top