Gujarat High Court
Alkaben Madhavlal Patel vs State Of Gujarat on 10 November, 2017
Author: G.R.Udhwani
Bench: G.R.Udhwani
R/CR.MA/26806/2017 ORDER
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL)
NO. 26806 of 2017
=============================================
ALKABEN MADHAVLAL PATEL....Applicant(s)
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT....Respondent(s)
=============================================
Appearance:
MR VIRAT G POPAT, ADVOCATE for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR JK SHAH, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
=============================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.R.UDHWANI
Date : 10/11/2017
ORAL ORDER
1. Heard learned Counsel for the applicant and learned APP on behalf of the respondent-State.
2. This application is filed seeking bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 in respect of the offences punishable under Sections 7, 13(1)(d), 13(2) and 15 of the Prevention of Corruption Act for which FIR came to be registered at ACB C.R. No. 15 of 2017 with ACB Police Station, Ahmedabad.
3. Learned advocate appearing on behalf of the applicant on instructions submits that the applicant ia ready and willing to abide by all the conditions, including the condition with regard to the powers of Investigating Agency to seek remand of the petitioner; subject to the petitioner's right to oppose it.
4. On the other hand, the learned APP appearing for the respondent-State has opposed this application.
Page 1 of 3
HC-NIC Page 1 of 3 Created On Fri Nov 10 23:59:15 IST 2017
R/CR.MA/26806/2017 ORDER
5. Having considered the rival contentions as also the
submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioner that in absence of material constituting the demand and acceptance on illegal gratification, the mere material evidencing only demand would not be sufficient to implicate the person under the provisions of Anti-corruption Act as also considering the submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioner that only material, as on date, sought to be relied upon against the petitioner is the alleged specific conversation allegedly making demand on illegal gratification as well as the decision rendered by this Court in case of Natvarlal Amarshibhai Devani Vs. State of Gujarat and Anr. reported in 2017 (1) G.L.H. 576, holding that in absence of any specific provision empowering the Police Officer or the Court in law, it is not permissible to subject an accused to the Voice Spectrography Test, the case for admitting the petitioner to anticipatory bail who is employed as PSI and thus there can be no apprehension of her fleeing from trial, and in absence of any apprehension of the petitioner tampering with the evidence or threating the witnesses, fleeing from justice at this stage, without discussing the evidence in detail, is made out.
6. In the result, this application is allowed. It is directed that in the event of arrest of the applicant herein in connection with FIR registered at ACB C.R. No.15 of 2017 with ACB Police Station, Ahmedabad, the applicant shall be released on bail on her furnishing a personal bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten thousands only) with one surety of the like amount on the following conditions that he shall:
(a) cooperate with the investigation and make herself available for interrogation whenever required;
(b) remain present at the concerned Police Station on 14.11.2017 between 11.00 a.m. and 2.00 p.m.;
(c) 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/them from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer;
Page 2 of 3
HC-NIC Page 2 of 3 Created On Fri Nov 10 23:59:15 IST 2017
R/CR.MA/26806/2017 ORDER
(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 her residence till the final disposal of the case till further orders;
(f) 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 the same on merits;
7. 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.
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. Rule is made is made absolute.
Direct service is permitted.
(G.R.UDHWANI, J.) Dolly Page 3 of 3 HC-NIC Page 3 of 3 Created On Fri Nov 10 23:59:15 IST 2017