Gujarat High Court
Sugrabibi Ilayas Khoda vs State Of Gujarat on 14 December, 2021
Author: A. C. Joshi
Bench: Ashokkumar C. Joshi
R/CR.MA/17012/2021 ORDER DATED: 14/12/2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION NO. 17012 of 2021
==========================================================
SUGRABIBI ILAYAS KHODA
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR. ALTAF Y CHARKHA(7271) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MS. MONALI BHATT, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE ASHOKKUMAR C. JOSHI
Date : 14/12/2021
ORAL ORDER
1. Heard learned advocate Mr. Altaf Charkha for the applicant and learned APP Ms. Monali Bhatt for the Respondent - State.
2. By way of the present application under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, the applicant- Ms. Sugrabibi Ilyas Khoda has prayed for anticipatory bail in connection with the FIR being C.R. No. 11207002210836 of 2021 registered with Godhra 'B' Division Police Station, District: Panchmahal for the offences punishable under Sections 8(2) and 10 of the Gujarat Animal Preservation Act and Sections 11(1)(I) and 11(1)(a) of the Animal Cruelty Act, and Section 429 of the IPC and Section 119 of the Gujarat Police Act.
3. The brief facts of the case are that on 19.08.2021, when the complainant - Mr. Alkeshbhai Bhalabhai- Police Constable of Godhra 'B' Division Police Station, was present at the Police Station at that time, the Police Inspector Mr. H.N. Patel received the secret information that a person who is carrying a bag of cow beef on motorcycle is coming to Mohammadi Mohalla to sell cow beef. That, Page 1 of 5 Downloaded on : Wed Jan 12 09:44:37 IST 2022 R/CR.MA/17012/2021 ORDER DATED: 14/12/2021 tow Panchas were called and caught the said person with beef about 35 K.G and the sample of the meat was collected by veterinary doctor and accordingly, FIR in question came to be filed.
4. Learned advocate for the applicant has submitted that the applicant is apprehending her arrest in connection the aforesaid FIR and in this connection the earlier application filed by the applicant before the learned Sessions Court came to be dis-allowed. Learned advocate for the applicant has submitted that just to give criminal colour, a false and frivolous complaint is created to pressurize the present applicant. He further submitted that the present applicant is a lady and there is no antecedent upon the present applicant. He also submittted that the role attributed to the present applicant is lesser than the prime accused and there is no need of custodial interrogation and therefore, the present application may kindly be allowed.
5. Learned advocate for the applicant has further argued that the applicant will keep available during the course of investigation and trial also and will not flee from justice.
6. 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 remand. He further submitted 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. Learned advocate, therefore, submitted that considering the above facts, the applicant may be granted anticipatory bail.
7. Learned APP Ms. Monali Bhatt appearing on behalf of the respondent - State has opposed grant of anticipatory bail and Page 2 of 5 Downloaded on : Wed Jan 12 09:44:37 IST 2022 R/CR.MA/17012/2021 ORDER DATED: 14/12/2021 submitted that the applicant is a supplier of beef and therefore, offence is of a serious nature, for which punishment is up to 10 years. She also submitted that looking to the nature and gravity of the offence, the discretion may not be exercised in favour of the applicant.
8. Having heard the arguments advanced by the learned advocates for the parties and perusing the material placed on record and taking into consideration the facts of the case, nature of allegations, gravity of offences, role attributed to the accused, without discussing the evidence in detail, at this stage, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the applicant.
9. This Court has considered following aspects,
(a) as per catena of decisions of Hon'ble Supreme Court there are mainly two factors which are required to be considered by this court;
(i) prima facie case
(ii) requirement of accused for custodial interrogation.
(b) The applicant is a lady (c) There is no antecedent upon the
lady applicant (d) the role of the present applicant is lesser than the prime accused. (e) the offence is under Sections 8(2) and 10 of the Gujarat Animal Preservation Act and Sections 11(1)(I) and 11(1)(a) of the Animal Cruelty Act, and Section 429 of the IPC and Section 119 of the Gujarat Police Act.
Therefore, in the facts and circumstances of the present case, this court is inclined to consider the case of the applicant.
10. This Court has also taken into consideration the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Sushila Aggarwal & Ors. Vs. State (NCT of Delhi)- Anr. reported Page 3 of 5 Downloaded on : Wed Jan 12 09:44:37 IST 2022 R/CR.MA/17012/2021 ORDER DATED: 14/12/2021 in 2020 SCC Online SC 98 and in the case of Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre Vs. State of Maharashtra and Ors., reported at [2011] 1 SCC 694, wherein the Hon'ble Apex Court reiterated the law laid down by the Constitution Bench in the case of Shri Gurubaksh Singh Sibbia & Ors. Vs. State of Punjab, reported at (1980) 2 SCC 565.
11. 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 the aforesaid FIR on executing a personal bond of Rs.15,000/- with one surety of like amount on the following conditions:
(a) shall cooperate with the investigation and make available for interrogation whenever required;
(b) shall remain present at concerned Police Station in presence of lady Police Officer, on 1 7 . 1 . 2 0 2 2 between 12.00 noon and 2.00 p.m.;
(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 her residence till the final disposal of the case till further orders;Page 4 of 5 Downloaded on : Wed Jan 12 09:44:37 IST 2022
R/CR.MA/17012/2021 ORDER DATED: 14/12/2021
(f) shall not leave India without the permission of the concerned trial court and if having passport shall deposit the same before the concerned 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 remand application without being influenced of the observations made by this Court;
12. 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.
13. At the trial, the concerned trial court shall not be influenced by the prima facie observations made by this Court in the present order.
14. Rule is made absolute. Direct service is permitted.
(A. C. JOSHI,J) prk Page 5 of 5 Downloaded on : Wed Jan 12 09:44:37 IST 2022