Gujarat High Court
Firozmiya Dosumiya Malek & vs State Of Gujarat on 8 May, 2013
Author: Anant S.Dave
Bench: Anant S. Dave
FIROZMIYA DOSUMIYA MALEKV/SSTATE OF GUJARAT....Respondent(s) R/CR.MA/7444/2013 ORDER IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL ) NO. 7444 of 2013 =============================================== FIROZMIYA DOSUMIYA MALEK & 1....Applicant(s) Versus STATE OF GUJARAT....Respondent(s) =============================================== Appearance: DHARMESH D NANAVATY, ADVOCATE for the Applicant(s) No. 1-2 MR HL JANI ADDL. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for the RESPONDENT(s) No. 1 =============================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ANANT S. DAVE Date : 08/05/2013 ORAL ORDER
1. Rule.
Learned APP, waives service of notice of Rule for respondent - State.
2. This application is filed under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in connection with first information report registered at CR No.I-11 of 2013 with Thasra Police Station, District: Nadiad, for the offences punishable under Sections323, 324, 504, 307, 325, 114 etc. of the Indian Penal Code and under Section 135 of the Gujarat Police Act.
3. Learned counsel for the applicants submit that name of the applicants surfaces on record after a passage of time and that other co-accused are considered for bail. It is submitted that the applicants are ready and willing to cooperate with the investigation and is not likely to flee from course of justice and by imposing suitable conditions, the applicants may be granted anticipatory bail.
4. Heard Learned APP for the respondent State.
5. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and perusing the record of the case and taking into consideration the facts of the case, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the applicants. This Court has also taken into consideration the law laid down by the Apex Court in the case of Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre v. State of Maharashtra & Ors. Reported in [2011]1 SCC 694, wherein the Apex Court reiterated the law laid down by the Constitutional Bench in the case of Shri Gurubaksh Singh Sibbia & Ors. Reported in [1980]2 SCC 565.
6. Learned counsel for the parties do not press for further reasoned order.
7. In the result, this application is allowed by directing that in the event of the applicants herein being arrested pursuant to FIR being CR No.I-11 of 2013 with Thasra Police Station, District: Nadiad, the applicants shall be released on bail on furnishing a bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) each with one surety of like amount on following conditions :-
[a] shall cooperate with the investigation and make themselves available for interrogation whenever required.
[b] shall remain present at concerned Police Station on 16.5.2013 between 11:00 am to 2:00 pm:
[c] shall not hamper the investigation in any manner nor shall directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any witness so as to dissuade them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any Police Officer;
[d] shall at the time of execution of bond, furnish the 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] will not leave India without the permission of the Court and, if is holding a Passport, shall surrender the same before the trial Court immediately [f] It would be open to the Investigating Officer to file an application for remand, if he considers it just and proper and the concerned Magistrate would decide it on merits.
[g] despite this order, it would be open for the Investigating Agency to apply to the competent Magistrate, for police remand of the applicant. The applicants 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 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.
8. For modification and/or deletion of any of the conditions herein above, the applicant/s will be at liberty to approach the concerned Court and such Court shall decide the application for modification and/or deletion of any of the conditions of this order in accordance with law.
9. At the trial, the trial court shall not be influenced by the observations of preliminary nature, qua the evidence at this stage, made by this Court while enlarging the applicant on bail.
10. Rule made absolute. Application is disposed of accordingly.
11. Direct service is permitted.
(ANANT S.DAVE, J.) SMITA Page 4 of 4