Niraj Mansukhbhai Gajera vs State Of Gujarat on 27 December, 2018

[Cites 10, Cited by 0]

Gujarat High Court

Niraj Mansukhbhai Gajera vs State Of Gujarat on 27 December, 2018

Bench: A.Y. Kogje

       R/CR.MA/22641/2018                                     ORDER




         IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

         R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION NO. 22641 of 2018

==========================================================
                       NIRAJ MANSUKHBHAI GAJERA
                                 Versus
                           STATE OF GUJARAT
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR K S CHANDRANI(6674) for the PETITIONER(s) No. 1
MR DM DEVNANI, APP for the RESPONDENT(s) No. 1
==========================================================

 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.Y. KOGJE

                            Date : 27/12/2018

                             ORAL ORDER

1. This application is filed by the applicant under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for regular bail in connection with FIR registered as C.R. No.I170/2018 with B Division Police Station, Rajkot for the offence punishable under Sections 409, 420, 465, 468, 471, 201, 424 and 120 B of the Indian Penal Code.

2. Learned advocate appearing on behalf of the applicant submits that considering the nature of offence, the applicant may be enlarged on regular bail by imposing suitable conditions.

3. On the other hand, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondentState has opposed grant of regular bail looking to the nature and gravity of the offence.

4. Learned Advocates appearing on behalf of the respective parties Page 1 of 4 R/CR.MA/22641/2018 ORDER do not press for a further reasoned order.

5. I have heard the learned advocates appearing on behalf of the respective parties and perused the papers. Following aspects are considered : (I) The applicant is in custody since 18/08/2018; (II) Investigation is concluded and chargesheet is filed. (III) Submission of learned advocate for the complainant that even from the FIR the applicant is shown to be an employee of accused no.3 and 4 who were the ultimate financial beneficent. (IV) Submission of learned advocate for the applicant that offence pertains to making wrong entries in the registry maintenance for the purpose of incoming goods, which were thereafter found to be burnt in fire but were actually disposed of in open market. (V) It is submitted that as per the FIR, the applicant had resisted instructions given by the accused no.3 and 4 for not making entries in the register.

(VI) No financial benefits was obtained by the applicant out of the offence and the coaccused has already been enlarged. (VII) Learned Additional Public Prosecutor under the instructions of the Investigating Officer is unable to bring on record any special circumstances against the applicant.

This Court has taken into consideration the law laid down by the Page 2 of 4 R/CR.MA/22641/2018 ORDER Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Sanjay Chandra v. Central Bureau of Investigation reported in [2012] 1 SCC 40.

6. In the facts and circumstances of the case and considering the nature of the allegations made against the applicant in the First Information Report, without discussing the evidence in detail, prima facie, this Court is of the opinion that this is a fit case to exercise the discretion and enlarge the applicant on regular bail.

7. Hence, the present application is allowed. The applicant is ordered to be released on regular bail in connection with C.R. No.I170/2018 with B Division Police Station, Rajkot on executing a personal bond of Rs.10,000/= (Rupees Ten Thousand Only) with one surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court and subject to the conditions that he shall;

(a) not take undue advantage of liberty or misuse liberty;

(b) not act in a manner injurious to the interest of the prosecution;

(d) not leave the State of Gujarat without prior permission of the Sessions Judge concerned;

(e) mark presence before the concerned Police Station on alternate Monday of every English calendar month for a period of six months between 11.00 a.m. and 2.00 p.m.;

Page 3 of 4

R/CR.MA/22641/2018 ORDER

(f) furnish the present address of his residence to the Investigating Officer and also to the Court at the time of execution of the bond and shall not change the residence without prior permission of this Court;

8. The authorities will release the applicant only if he is not required in connection with any other offence for the time being. If breach of any of the above conditions is committed, the Sessions Judge concerned will be free to issue warrant or take appropriate action in the matter.

9. Bail bond to be executed before the lower Court having jurisdiction to try the case. It will be open for the concerned Court to delete, modify and/or relax any of the above conditions, in accordance with law.

10. 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.

11. The application is allowed in the aforesaid terms. Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent. Direct Service is permitted.

(A.Y. KOGJE, J) Radhika Srinivasan Page 4 of 4

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Gujarat High Court