Gujarat High Court
Sadgunaben Chandrakant Rathod vs State Of Gujarat on 25 October, 2023
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/19119/2023 ORDER DATED: 25/10/2023
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL) NO. 19119
of 2023
==========================================================
SADGUNABEN CHANDRAKANT RATHOD
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR BHAVIK J PANDYA(5002) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR MANISH J PATEL(2131) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MS SHRUTI PATHAK, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HASMUKH D. SUTHAR
Date : 25/10/2023
ORAL ORDER
1. Rule. Ld. APP waives service for the respondent State.
2. By way of the present application under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, the applicant - accused has prayed for anticipatory bail in connection with the FIR bearing No.11196030230743 of 2023 registered with Sayajiganj Police Station, Vadodara City, for the offences punishable under Sections 406, 465, 467, 468, 471 and 120 B of Indian Penal Code, 1860.
3. Learned advocate for the applicant submits that the applicant has falsely been enroped in the offence and she has not played any role in the alleged offence. It is alleged that the applicant and her son have forged one power of attorney and produced before the Vadodara Municipal Corporation claiming that they are owners of the property in question and taken tax benefit though they are the tenants. They have also forged some documents and taken undue advantage. He submitted that, in the year 2022, property came to be sold by registered sale deed and there is no change in the title of Page 1 of 5 Downloaded on : Thu Oct 26 20:44:26 IST 2023 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/19119/2023 ORDER DATED: 25/10/2023 undefined the property and even the applicant herself has wrote a letter to the Corporation to remove her name from the possession of the disputed property. The applicant is lady and no past antecedent. Even the applicant has filed civil proceedings, in which decree has been passed against the applicant and against it, the applicant has filed an appeal before this Court, which is pending at present. Further, the applicant is having paralysis and in such circumstances, there is no possibility to flee away from justice and therefore, custodial interrogation is not necessary. In view of the above, the applicant may be granted anticipatory bail.
4. 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 her 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.
5. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the respondent - State has opposed grant of anticipatory bail contending that there was intention of cheating from its inception and the applicant in connivance with her son executed forged power of attorney and in the guise of said power of attorney which was produced before the Corporation for reducing the tax amount and duped the money of the Corporation. She further submitted that, the said property is sublet to Cafe Coffee Day and they have encashed the rent amount in the capacity of owners. Merely civil proceedings is filed is not a ground to entertain this application and on the contrary, decree is passed in favour of the complainant.
Page 2 of 5 Downloaded on : Thu Oct 26 20:44:26 IST 2023NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/19119/2023 ORDER DATED: 25/10/2023 undefined Investigation is at preliminary stage. Therefore, in such circumstanes, custodial interrogation is required and he requested to dismiss the present application.
6. 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.
(i) Applicant is 65 years old lady and suffering from paralysis;
(ii) whatever the allegation levelled is against her son Pratik Rathod, who has forged power of attorney;
(iii) Going through the affidavit filed by investigating officer, it appears that Pratik Rathod has forged the documents in the year 2018;Page 3 of 5 Downloaded on : Thu Oct 26 20:44:26 IST 2023
NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/19119/2023 ORDER DATED: 25/10/2023 undefined
(iv) nothing is required to be recovered and discovered from the applicant-accused. However, right to seek remand of applicant is also kept open;
(v) case is based on documentary evidence;
(vi) no past criminal antecedent of the present applicant.
7. 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.
8. In the result, the present application is allowed. The applicant is ordered to be released on bail in the event of her arrest in connection with FIR bearing No.11196030230743 of 2023 registered with Sayajiganj Police Station, Vadodara City on executing a personal bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand Only) each with one surety of like amount on the following conditions:
(a) she shall cooperate with the investigation and make herself available for interrogation whenever required;
(b) shall remain present at the concerned Police Station on 02.11.2023 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;Page 4 of 5 Downloaded on : Thu Oct 26 20:44:26 IST 2023
NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/19119/2023 ORDER DATED: 25/10/2023 undefined
(e) shall at the time of execution of bond, furnish the address to the investigating officer and the court concerned and shall not change her 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;
9. 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
10. At the trial, the concerned trial court shall not be influenced by the prima facie observations made by this Court in the present order. Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent. Direct service is permitted.
(HASMUKH D. SUTHAR,J) SUCHIT Page 5 of 5 Downloaded on : Thu Oct 26 20:44:26 IST 2023