Gujarat High Court
Mahesh @ Bhovan Bhagvanji Vaghela (In ... vs State Of Gujarat on 27 January, 2020
Author: Vipul M. Pancholi
Bench: Vipul M. Pancholi
R/CR.MA/22429/2019 ORDER
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION NO. 22429 of 2019
=======================================================
MAHESH @ BHOVAN BHAGVANJI VAGHELA
(IN FACT) MAHESH BHOVAN @ BHAGVANJI VAGHELA
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT
=======================================================
Appearance:
MR CHINTAN S POPAT(5004) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR HK PATEL APP(2) for the Respondent(s) No. 1
=======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE VIPUL M. PANCHOLI
Date : 27/01/2020
ORAL ORDER
1. The present application is filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, for regular bail in connection with FIR being C.R. No.I111/2018 registered with 'B' Division City Police Station for offence under Sections 420, 408 and 381 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 66(C) and 66(D) of the Information Technology Act.
2. Learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the applicant submits that considering the nature of the offence, the applicant may be enlarged on regular bail by imposing suitable conditions.
3. Learned APP appearing on behalf of the respondent State has opposed grant of regular bail looking to the nature and gravity of the offence.
4. Learned Advocates appearing on behalf of the respective parties do not press for further reasoned order.
5. Having heard the learned advocates for the parties Page 1 of 4 Downloaded on : Mon Jan 27 23:50:10 IST 2020 R/CR.MA/22429/2019 ORDER 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, this Court is of the opinion that this is a fit case to exercise the discretion and enlarge the applicant on regular bail.
6. This Court has considered following aspects,
(a) the applicant is in jail since 01.08.2019;
(b) the investigation is concluded and the chargesheet is filed long back;
(c) it is submitted that three other coaccused have been enlarged on bail by the concerned Sessions Court;
(d) it is also submitted that for the alleged incident which had taken place in July, 2016, FIR is lodged on 22.06.2018. Thus there is a delay of approximately 2 years in lodging the FIR;
(e) the case is triable by the Court of Magistrate;
(f) I have considered the role attributed to the applicant. I have also perused the material placed on record;
(g) It is required to be note that initially the FIR was filed for the offence punishable under Sections 420, 465, 468 and 471 of Indian Penal Code. However, thereafter report has been submitted by the Investigating Officer for deletion of Sections 465, 468 and 471 and addition of Sections 408 and 381 of Indian Penal Code and Sections 66C and 66D of Page 2 of 4 Downloaded on : Mon Jan 27 23:50:10 IST 2020 R/CR.MA/22429/2019 ORDER the Information Technology Act. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the present case, I am inclined to consider the case of the applicant.
7. This Court has also taken into consideration the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Sanjay Chandra Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation, reported in [2012] 1 SCC 40.
8. Hence, the present application is allowed. The applicant is ordered to be released on regular bail in connection with FIR being C.R. No.I 111/2018 registered with 'B' Division City Police Station on executing a personal bond of Rs.10,000/ (Rupees Ten Thousand only) with one surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court and subject to the conditions that he shall;
[a] not take undue advantage of liberty or misuse liberty;
[b] not act in a manner injurious to the interest of the prosecution;
[c] surrender passport, if any, to the lower court within a week;
[d] not leave the India without prior permission of the concerned trial court; [e] mark presence before the concerned Police Station between 1st to 10th day of every English calendar month for a period of six months between 11:00 a.m. and 2:00 p.m.; [f] furnish the present address of residence to the Investigating Officer and also to the Court at the time of execution of the Page 3 of 4 Downloaded on : Mon Jan 27 23:50:10 IST 2020 R/CR.MA/22429/2019 ORDER bond and shall not change the residence without prior permission of the concerned trial court;
9. The authorities will release the applicant only if he is not required in connection with any other offence for the time being. If breach of any of the above conditions is committed, the Sessions Judge concerned will be free to issue warrant or take appropriate action in the matter. Bail bond to be executed before the lower Court having jurisdiction to try the case. It will be open for the concerned Court to delete, modify and/or relax any of the above conditions, in accordance with law.
10. At the trial, the Trial Court shall not be influenced by the prima facie observations made by this Court in the present order.
11. Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent.
Direct service is permitted.
(VIPUL M. PANCHOLI, J.) Gautam Page 4 of 4 Downloaded on : Mon Jan 27 23:50:10 IST 2020