Gujarat High Court
Pravinbhai Shantilal Shah vs State Of Gujarat on 2 February, 2017
Author: C.L.Soni
Bench: C.L. Soni
R/CR.MA/32998/2016 ORDER
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL ) NO. 32998
of 2016
===========================================================
PRAVINBHAI SHANTILAL SHAH....Applicant(s)
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT....Respondent(s)
================================================================
Appearance:
MR PARTHIV B SHAH, ADVOCATE for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MS MOXA THAKKAR, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
================================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.L. SONI
Date : 02/02/2017
ORAL ORDER
1. By way of the present application under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 ('the Code'), the applicant has prayed to release him on bail in case of his arrest in connection with the FIR being CR NO.I-82 of 2016 registered with Bhabhar Police Station, Dist.- Banaskantha, for the offences punishable under Sections 406, 420, 465, 467, 468 and 471 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.
2. Learned Advocate Mr. AJ Yagnik is appearing with learned advocate Mr. Shah for the applicant submitted that the civil dispute between the parties is sought to be given colour of criminal offences by lodging the FIR against the applicant. He submitted that based on the dissolution of the partnership firm, the applicant, in fact, had started doing the business as proprietor and for more than seven years neither the informant nor any of his family members has raised any Page 1 of 4 HC-NIC Page 1 of 4 Created On Sat Feb 04 00:43:13 IST 2017 R/CR.MA/32998/2016 ORDER objection. He submitted that the partnership account which was maintained by the Banaskantha Jila Madhyastha Sahkari Bank, Bhabhar Branch was closed in the year 2008 and after the applicant had started business as a proprietor and now after about eight years, the present FIR is filed to settle the score of civil dispute with the applicant. He, therefore, urged to exercise discretion in favour of the applicant under Section 438 of the Code.
3. Learned APP Ms. Thakkar on the other hand submitted that the allegations made in the FIR are of making false documents of dissolution of the partnership firm and in connection with the allegations made in the FIR, since the investigation is in progress, the Court may not exercise the discretion at this stage in favour of the applicant under section 438 of the Code.
4. The Court, having heard the learned advocates for both the sides and having considered the allegations made in the FIR with the police papers, and having also considered that the partnership firm was stated to be dissolved before about eight years on alleged false dissolution document, finds that discretion deserves to be exercised under Section 438 of the Code in favour of the applicant.
5. In the result, the present application is allowed. It is ordered that in case the applicant herein is arrested in connection with the FIR being CR NO.I-82 of 2016 registered with Bhabhar Police Station, Dist.- Banaskantha, he shall be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousands only) with one surety of like amount, Page 2 of 4 HC-NIC Page 2 of 4 Created On Sat Feb 04 00:43:13 IST 2017 R/CR.MA/32998/2016 ORDER 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 09.02.2017 between 11:00 a.m. and 2:00 p.m.;
(c) shall not misuse his liberty;
(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 or till further orders;
(f) shall not leave India without the permission of the Court and, if having passports shall surrender the same before the Trial Court within a week.
6. This order shall not be construed to divest the Investigating Agency to ask for remand of the applicant if required. In such case, 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 Page 3 of 4 HC-NIC Page 3 of 4 Created On Sat Feb 04 00:43:13 IST 2017 R/CR.MA/32998/2016 ORDER 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. The present application is disposed of accordingly.
Direct service is permitted.
(C.L.SONI, J.) Gupta* Page 4 of 4 HC-NIC Page 4 of 4 Created On Sat Feb 04 00:43:13 IST 2017