Gujarat High Court
Pareshbhai Prahladbhai Patel vs State Of Gujarat & on 21 August, 2014
Author: A.J.Desai
Bench: A.J.Desai
R/CR.MA/8179/2014 ORDER
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL ) NO. 8179 of
2014
===========================================================
PARESHBHAI PRAHLADBHAI PATEL....Applicant(s)
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & 1....Respondent(s)
================================================================
Appearance:
MR YOGESH LAKHANI, SR. COUNSEL WITH MR SK PATEL, ADVOCATE
for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR RITURAJ M MEENA, ADVOCATE for the Respondent(s) No. 2
MR LB DABHI, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
===========================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.J.DESAI
Date : 21/08/2014
ORAL ORDER
1 By way of the present application under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, the applicant accused has prayed to release him on anticipatory bail in case of his arrest in connection with the FIR registered at CR No. I98 of 2014 before Gandhinagar Police Station, Sector 7, for the offenses punishable under Sections 406, 420, 465, 467, 471, 506(2), 114 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code.
2 Pursuant to the Order dated 9.6.2014, the original complainant appeared through learned Advocate Mr. Rituraj M. Meena. Papers of the investigation have been placed for perusal of the court by learned APP Mr. LB Dabhi. The matter was heard at length. On 20.6.2014, the following order was passed by this Court on 20.6.2014.
"Stand over to 15.7.2014. Till then, no coercive steps shall be taken against the applicant. However, the applicant shall cooperate with the investigation and shall remain present before the Investigating Officer if he is called for further information. Direct Service is permitted."Page 1 of 4
R/CR.MA/8179/2014 ORDER Thereafter, the matter has been adjourned time and again and in the meanwhile, the applicant had remained present before the Investigation Office for more than ten times and had supplied the relevant documents.
3. Heard the learned counsel for the parties. Considering the fact that the applicant is a Chartered Accountant and had worked for the company. 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 vs. State of Maharashtra and Ors. as reported at [2011] 1 SCC 6941, wherein the Hon'ble Apex Court reiterated the law laid down by the Constitutional Bench in the case of case of e case of e case of Shri Gurubaksh Singh Sibbia & Ors., as reported at (1980) 2 SCC 665.
4 Mr. Rituraj M. Meena, learned Advocate, appearing for the respondent No.2 - original complainant, requested not to assign any reason.
5 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 CR No.I98 of 2014 before Gandhinagar Police Station, Sector7, the applicant shall be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond of Rs.25,000/ (Rupees twenty five thousand only) with one local 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 27.8.2014 between 11.00 a.m. and 2.00 p.m.;
(c) not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise
Page 2 of 4
R/CR.MA/8179/2014 ORDER
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) 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 it on merits;
6. 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 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 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.
7 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. Direct service is permitted.
Page 3 of 4 R/CR.MA/8179/2014 ORDER
(A.J.DESAI, J.)
pnnair
Page 4 of 4