Gujarat High Court
Parasbhai Nanalal Jain vs State Of Gujarat on 5 February, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/2467/2025 ORDER DATED: 05/02/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL) NO. 2467
of 2025
==========================================================
PARASBHAI NANALAL JAIN
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR JAY N SHAH(10668) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR HARDIK MEHTA, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HASMUKH D. SUTHAR
Date : 05/02/2025
ORAL ORDER
RULE. Learned APP waives service of notice of Rule for and on behalf of the respondent No.1 - State of Gujarat.
[1.0] By way of the present application under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short "BNSS"), the applicant accused has prayed to release him on anticipatory bail in the event of his arrest in connection with the FIR being C.R. No.11210050241568 of 2024 registered with Rander Police Station, District Surat for the offences punishable under Sections 318(4), 351(3), 3(5), 61(2) and 296(b) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short "BNS").
[2.0] Learned advocate for the applicant submits that the applicant has nothing to do with the offence and on the contrary the applicant, who is the 25% partner of M/s. Vardhman Ambika Foundation - partnership firm, is the purchaser of the disputed property from the predecessor in title i.e. the heirs of the complainant namely Md. Haji Ismail Khadki and others. Further, there was no privy of contract and/or any direct transaction between the complainant and the applicant. It is further submitted that prior to the alleged transaction, in the year 2016, the said property was an open land on which a scheme was floated and at that time complainant had purchased Page 1 of 5 Uploaded by SUCHITKUMAR PATEL(HC01083) on Wed Feb 05 2025 Downloaded on : Wed Feb 05 22:28:47 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/2467/2025 ORDER DATED: 05/02/2025 undefined two flats in the said scheme prior to the alleged transaction and thus, there is no offence of cheating or inducement being made out against the present applicant. Allegation against the applicant is that, he has administered threat to the complainant. Earlier one application was filed before Umara Police Station and the applicant appeared before the authority and joined investigation. Notice under Section 35 of BNS is not served and was served through mobile which is not permissible mode. The applicant is 61 years old. Further, the applicant is not having any past antecedent. Therefore, custodial interrogation at this stage is not necessary. Besides, the applicant is available during the course of investigation and will not flee from justice. In view of the above, the applicant may be granted anticipatory bail.
[3.0] Learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the respondent - State has opposed grant of anticipatory bail looking to the nature and gravity of the offence. He has submitted that present applicant is involved in the offence and investigation is at nascent stage. Though the property was open land it was sold under the guise of constructing flats and at that time, the complainant was minor and subsequently the said property was sold by predecessor in title of accused Nos.4 to 7 to the partnership firm of the present applicant and there being fraudulent transaction, custodial interrogation of the applicant is required. Hence, he has requested to dismiss the present application.
[4.0] Having heard the learned advocate for the parties and perusing the investigation papers, it is equally incumbent upon the Court to exercise its discretion judiciously, cautiously and strictly in compliance with the basic principles laid down in a plethora of decisions of the Hon'ble Apex Court on the point. It is well settled that, among other circumstances, the factors to be borne in mind while considering an application for bail are (i) the nature and gravity of the accusation; (ii) the antecedents of the applicant including the fact as to whether he has previously undergone imprisonment on conviction by a Court in respect of any cognizable offence; (iii) the possibility Page 2 of 5 Uploaded by SUCHITKUMAR PATEL(HC01083) on Wed Feb 05 2025 Downloaded on : Wed Feb 05 22:28:47 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/2467/2025 ORDER DATED: 05/02/2025 undefined of the applicant to flee from justice; and (iv) where the accusation has been made with the object of injuring or humiliating the applicant by having him so arrested. Though at the stage of granting bail an elaborate examination of evidence and detailed reasons touching the merit of the case, which may prejudice the accused, should be avoided. I have considered the following aspects.
(1) Offence is not punishable with life imprisonment or death penalty;
(2) A bare perusal of the complaint reveals that present applicant is the partner of partnership firm M/s. Vardhman Ambika Foundation, which purchased the disputed property by way of registered sale deed on 24.06.2016 by paying Rs.1.40 Crores to the predecessor in title of the heirs of one Md. Haji Ismail Khadki and on the said property the complainant owned two flats and thereafter the alleged sale transaction took place however, there is no any direct transaction between the complainant and applicant and no privy of contract between the complainant and applicant and there is no allegation which suggests that there was any dishonest intention or inducement on the part of the applicant qua the complainant.
(3) Allegation against the applicant is that, he has administrated threats. (4) Applicant is aged 61 years suffering from various age related ailments;
(5) Applicant is not having any past antecedent;
(6) No case of custodial interrogation made out by the prosecution.
[5.0] Considering the aforesaid aspects and the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre vs. State of Maharashtra and Ors. reported in (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 Sibbia & Ors. reported in (1980) 2 SCC 665 and also the decision in the case of Sushila Aggarwal v. State (NCT of Delhi) reported in (2020) 5 SCC 1, I am inclined to allow the present Page 3 of 5 Uploaded by SUCHITKUMAR PATEL(HC01083) on Wed Feb 05 2025 Downloaded on : Wed Feb 05 22:28:47 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/2467/2025 ORDER DATED: 05/02/2025 undefined application.
[6.0] In the result, the present application is allowed by directing that in the event of arrest / appearance of the applicant in connection with FIR being C.R. No.11210050241568 of 2024 registered with Rander Police Station, District Surat, the applicant shall be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand Only) with one surety of like amount on the following conditions that applicant:
(a) shall cooperate with the investigation and make himself available for interrogation whenever required;
(b) shall remain present at the concerned Police Station on 10/02/2025 between 11.00 a.m. and 2.00 p.m. and the IO shall ensure that no unnecessary harassment or inconvenience is caused to the applicant;
(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 her/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;
(g) an order of anticipatory bail does not in any manner limit or restrict the rights or duties of the police or investigative agency, to investigate into the charges against the person who seeks and is granted pre-arrest bail;
(h) It is open to the police or the investigating agency to move the learned trial Court for a direction under Section 439(2) to arrest the accused, in the event of violation of any term, such as absconding, non-cooperating during investigation, evasion, intimidation or inducement to witnesses with a view to Page 4 of 5 Uploaded by SUCHITKUMAR PATEL(HC01083) on Wed Feb 05 2025 Downloaded on : Wed Feb 05 22:28:47 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/2467/2025 ORDER DATED: 05/02/2025 undefined influence outcome of the investigation or trial, etc.-
[7.0] 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.
[8.0] Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent. Application is disposed of accordingly. Direct service is permitted.
(HASMUKH D. SUTHAR,J) SUCHIT Page 5 of 5 Uploaded by SUCHITKUMAR PATEL(HC01083) on Wed Feb 05 2025 Downloaded on : Wed Feb 05 22:28:47 IST 2025