Gujarat High Court
Sandeep Chhaganbhai Ugareja vs State Of Gujarat on 29 August, 2023
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/12904/2023 ORDER DATED: 29/08/2023
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL MISC. APPLICATION NO. 12904 of 2023
======================================
SANDEEP CHHAGANBHAI UGAREJA
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT
======================================
Appearance:
MR. HRIDAY BUCH, ADVOCATE WITH MR BHAVIN S RAIYANI(3855) for
the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR. L. B. DABHI, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
======================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HASMUKH D. SUTHAR
Date : 29/08/2023
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 the event of his arrest in connection with the FIR being C.R. No.11213091230327 of 2023 with Sapar Veraval Police Station, Rajkot for the offences punishable under Sections 465, 467, 468, 471 and 114 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.
2. Learned advocate for the applicant submitted that the complaint came to be filed at the instance of one Mr.Bharatbhai Karshanbhai, who is the owner of the plots nos.2, 11 and 12 situated at Revenue Survey no.204/3, village Veraval, Taluka Kotda Sangani, District Rajkot. Further it is alleged that as per the original lay-
Page 1 of 7 Downloaded on : Sun Sep 17 02:51:55 IST 2023NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/12904/2023 ORDER DATED: 29/08/2023 undefined out plan of the TDO, the said revenue survey number having 13 plots and there was common passage and common plot was prescribed for the general and common utility as per the plan. The said plan approved by the TDO and the same was subsequently forged and map was prepared and between plot nos.10 and 11, plot no.14 was renumbered and it was stated as ownerhsip of accused no.1 - Thakershibhai Dudabhai. It is alleged that the said plot is thereafter sold by accused no.1 to accused no.2 - Vinodbhai Arjanbhai by way of registered sale deed and Vinodbhai sold it to the present applicant and thus present applicant is involved in the present offence. He has nothing to do with the offence. He has even filed the complaint under the Land Grabbing Act. Even on the face of it, it is accepted that the alleged transaction of forged document took place in the year 2001. At that time the present applicant was minor. Even Thakershibhai Dudabhai is released on regular bail while Vinodbhai and other similarly situated other accused are also enlarged on anticipatory bail.
Learned advocate for the applicant submits that the nature of allegations are such for which 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 Page 2 of 7 Downloaded on : Sun Sep 17 02:51:55 IST 2023 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/12904/2023 ORDER DATED: 29/08/2023 undefined applicant may be granted anticipatory bail.
Learned advocate for the applicant, on instructions, states that the applicant is ready and willing to abide by all the conditions including imposition of conditions with regard to powers of Investigating Agency to file an application before the competent Court for his remand. He would further submit that upon filing of such application by the Investigating Agency, the right of applicant accused to oppose such application on merits may be kept open.
3. Mr. Dabhi, 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.
Mr. Dabhi, learned APP for the respondent - State submitted that government record being forged and all the accused have in their connivance have committed an offence and thorough investigation is required and for that custodial interrogation is only a way. Further he has submitted that Thakershibhai is enlarged on regular bail and role of other accused were on different footing hence, benefit of parity is not available to the present applicant and hence he has requested to dismiss the present application.
Page 3 of 7 Downloaded on : Sun Sep 17 02:51:55 IST 2023NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/12904/2023 ORDER DATED: 29/08/2023 undefined
4. 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) whether there is any prima facie or reasonable ground to believe that the accused had committed the offence; (ii) nature and gravity of the accusation; (iii) severity of the punishment in the event of conviction; (iv) danger of the accused absconding or fleeing, if released on bail; (v) character, behaviour, means, position and standing of the accused; (vi) likelihood of the offence being repeated; (vii) reasonable apprehension of the witnesses being influenced; and (viii) danger, of course, of justice being thwarted by grant of bail. 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) The offence is based on the documentary evidence; documents are available in public record; (2) So far alleged forged document is concerned, which is forged by one Thakarshibhai, who has mentioned plot no.14 in his name and subsequently he has transferred the said plot to one Vinodbhai and then Page 4 of 7 Downloaded on : Sun Sep 17 02:51:55 IST 2023 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/12904/2023 ORDER DATED: 29/08/2023 undefined to Arjanbhai and then subsequently by way of a registered sale deed the said plot is transferred to the present applicant. Thus it appears that the present applicant is subsequent purchaser. At initial point of time, he was not involved in the said transaction. (3) The alleged transaction of forged document took place in the year 2001 or subsequent and the involvement of the present applicant if considered, even though his Power of Attorney has filed the application to initiate the proceeding under the Land Grabbing Act. (4) The similarly situated accused Vinodbhai is also enlarged by the learned Sessions Judge.
5. 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 application.
6. In the result, the present application is allowed by directing that in the event of applicant herein being arrested in connection with the FIR being C.R. No.11213091230327 of 2023 with Sapar Veraval Police Station, Rajkot, the applicant shall be released Page 5 of 7 Downloaded on : Sun Sep 17 02:51:55 IST 2023 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/12904/2023 ORDER DATED: 29/08/2023 undefined 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 he:
(a) shall cooperate with the investigation and make himself available for interrogation whenever required;
(b) shall remain present at the concerned Police Station on 13/09/2023 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 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;
7. Despite this order, it would be open for the Investigating Agency to apply to the competent Magistrate, for police Page 6 of 7 Downloaded on : Sun Sep 17 02:51:55 IST 2023 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/12904/2023 ORDER DATED: 29/08/2023 undefined 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. 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.
8. 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.
9. Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent.
Application is disposed of accordingly. Direct service is permitted.
(HASMUKH D. SUTHAR, J.) AMAR RATHOD...
Page 7 of 7 Downloaded on : Sun Sep 17 02:51:55 IST 2023