Gujarat High Court
Rajendrabhai Vitthalbhai Patel vs State Of Gujarat on 31 July, 2015
Author: Z.K.Saiyed
Bench: Z.K.Saiyed
R/CR.MA/9236/2015 ORDER
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION NO. 9236 of 2015
(FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL )
========================================================
RAJENDRABHAI VITTHALBHAI PATEL....Applicant(s)
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT....Respondent(s)
========================================================
Appearance:
MR DR BHATT, ADVOCATE for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MS JIRGA JHAVERI, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
========================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE Z.K.SAIYED
Date : 31/07/2015
ORAL ORDER
1. This is an application for anticipatory bail Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in connection with the FIR bearing CR No. I-108 of 2014 registered with Bhiloda Police Station, Dist. Arvalli, for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 465, 467, 468, and 471 of the Indian Penal Code.
2. Heard learned Advocate Mr.D.R.Bhatt for the applicant and learned APP Ms. Jirga Jhaveri for the respondent State.
3. Learned Advocate Mr.D.R.Bhatt has submitted has read the complaint and contended that the present applicant is totally innocent and he ahs not committed any offence as alleged in the complaint. He further contended that there is no Page 1 of 5 R/CR.MA/9236/2015 ORDER justification for filling this complaint at such belated stage at about after 8 years. He has further contended that the present complaint is filed to pressurize the present accused to settle the civil disputes and he has further contended that in the present case it is purely civil nature. He further submitted that the present applicant will always be available before the investigating agency for interrogation or investigation. He prayed to entertain the present application.
4. Learned APP Ms. Jirga Jhaveri for the Respondent State has opposed the present application and vehemently argued that the present applicant cannot be released on anticipatory bail.
5. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and perusing the record of the case and taking into consideration the facts of the case, nature of allegations, role attributed to the accused and punishment prescribed for the alleged offences, 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 Satlingappa Mhetre v. State of Maharashtra and Ors., reported in (2011)1 SCC 694, wherein the Hon'ble Apex Court reiterated the law laid down by the Constitutional Bench in Page 2 of 5 R/CR.MA/9236/2015 ORDER 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, the present application is allowed by directing that in the event of applicant herein being arrested pursuant to FIR being C.R.No.I108 of 2014 registered with Bhiloda Police Station, Dist. Aravalli, the applicant shall be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond of Rs.10,000/ (Rupees Ten Thousands 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 and wherever required;
b) shall remain present at the concerned Police Station on 5th August, 2015 at 11.00 a.m.;
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 him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer;
d) at the time of execution of bond, furnish
Page 3 of 5
R/CR.MA/9236/2015 ORDER
him 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 State of Gujarat without the permission of the Court and, if holding a passport, he 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;
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 cooperate with the Investigating Officer for the signatures and for the purpose of handwriting expert's opinion. 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 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 Page 4 of 5 R/CR.MA/9236/2015 ORDER the learned Magistrate to consider such a request in accordance with law. It is 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. Rule is made absolute. Application is disposed of accordingly. Direct service is permitted.
(Z.K.SAIYED, J.) Tuvar Page 5 of 5