Gujarat High Court
Jayeshbhai Dineshbhai Halpati vs State Of Gujarat on 2 February, 2015
Author: J.B.Pardiwala
Bench: J.B.Pardiwala
R/CR.MA/1815/2015 ORDER
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL ) NO. 1815 of
2015
================================================================
JAYESHBHAI DINESHBHAI HALPATI....Applicant(s)
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT....Respondent(s)
================================================================
Appearance:
MR ZUBIN F BHARDA, ADVOCATE for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR KP RAVAL, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
================================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE J.B.PARDIWALA
Date : 02/02/2015
ORAL ORDER
1. Rule returnable forthwith. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor waives service of notice of rule on behalf of the respondent State.
2. By way of the present application under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, the applicant original accused has prayed to release him on anticipatory bail in case of his arrest in connection with the FIR registered at C.R.No.I215 of 2014 before the Chikhali Police Station, DistrictNavsari for the offence punishable under Sections323, 325, 506(2), 386 r/w. 114 of the IPC and Section135 of the Gujarat Police Act.
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.
Page 1 of 4R/CR.MA/1815/2015 ORDER
4. On the other hand, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondentState has opposed this application 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 the 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 Honble Apex Court in the case of Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre vs. State of Maharashtra and Ors. as reported at [2011] 1 SCC 6941, wherein the Honble Apex Court reiterated the law laid down by the Constitutional Bench in the case of Shri Gurubaksh Singh Sibbia & 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 powers of Investigating Agency to file an application before the competent court for his remand. He would 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 arrest of the applicant herein in connection with the FIR registered at C.R.No.I215 of 2014 before the Chikhali Police Station, DistrictNavsari, the applicant shall be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond of Rs.10,000/ (Rupees Ten Thousand Page 2 of 4 R/CR.MA/1815/2015 ORDER only) with one surety of like amount on the following conditions that he shall:
(a) cooperate with the investigation and make himself available for interrogation whenever required;
(b) remain present at concerned Police Station on 06.02.2015 between 11.00 a.m. and 2.00 p.m.;
(c) 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/them from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer;
(d) 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) 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 till further orders;
(f) shall not leave India without the permission of the Court and if having passport, shall deposit the same before the Trial Court within a week; and
(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 and on all subsequent occasions, as may be directed by the learned Magistrate. This Page 3 of 4 R/CR.MA/1815/2015 ORDER 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 clarified that the applicants, 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 primafacie observations made by this Court while enlarging the applicant on bail. Rule is made absolute. Direct service is permitted.
(J.B.PARDIWALA, J.) aruna Page 4 of 4