Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 15, Cited by 0]

Gujarat High Court

Rakesh Trilokchnand Gupta vs State Of Gujarat on 26 September, 2018

Author: A.J.Desai

Bench: A.J.Desai

       R/CR.MA/19882/2017                                             ORDER



         IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

         R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION NO. 19882 of 2017

================================================================
                      RAKESH TRILOKCHNAND GUPTA
                                 Versus
                           STATE OF GUJARAT
================================================================
Appearance:
MR.N.D.NANAVATY, SENIOR ADVOCATE with YASH NANAVATY FOR
NANAVATY ADVOCATES(1373) for the PETITIONER(s) No. 1
MS MAITHILI MEHTA, APP for the RESPONDENT(s) No. 1
================================================================

 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.J.DESAI

                               Date : 26/09/2018
                                ORAL ORDER

1. By way of the present application under Section 438 of the Code  of Criminal Procedure, 1973, the applicant accused has prayed to  release him on anticipatory bail in case of his arrest in connection  with   the   FIR   registered   at  C.R.No.   I   -   192   of   2016   with  Gandhidham   'A'   Division   Police  Station,   Kutch   (East)  for  the  offenses punishable under Sections 177406409419420465468471474477(A) and 120(B) etc.  of the Indian Penal Code  and 85(1)(b)(c)(e)(f)(g) and 85(4) etc. of Gujarat Value Added  Tax Act, 2003.

2. Learned   advocate   for   the   applicant   submits   that   the   nature   of  allegations are such for which custodial interrogation at this stage  is   not   necessary.   Besides,   the   applicant   is   available   during   the  course of investigation and will not flee from justice. In view of  the above, the applicant may be granted anticipatory bail.

Learned   advocate   for   the   applicant   on   instructions   states  that   the   applicant   is   ready   and   willing   to   abide   by   all   the  Page 1 of 4 R/CR.MA/19882/2017 ORDER conditions   including   imposition   of   conditions   with   regard   to  powers of Investigating Agency to file an application before the  competent Court for his  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.

3. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the  respondent­State has opposed grant of anticipatory 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. It   appears   that   the   Coordinate   Bench   of   this   Court   (Coram   : 

Hon'ble Mr. Justice S.H.Vora), by oral order dated 29.11.2017, the  applicant   was   directed   to   appear   before   the   concerned  Investigating Officer and the Investigating Officer was directed not  to arrest the applicant in connection with the offence and interim  relief is  extended time  and again  and the  applicant did remain  present   before   Investigating   Officer.   It   is   pertinent   to   note   that  when the  applicant was involved in the  another similar type of  offence,   the   applicant   was   in   judicial   custody   and   the   FIR   in  question was pending and when he was in judicial custody, he was  not arrested and subsequent to his release in the said offence, the  Investigating   Officer   intended   to   arrest   the   applicant.   Having  heard   the   learned   advocate   for   the   parties   and   perusing   the  investigating papers and as well as 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  Page 2 of 4 R/CR.MA/19882/2017 ORDER applicant.   This   Court   has   also  taken  into  consideration  the   law  laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of  Siddharam  Satlingappa   Mhetre   vs.   State   of   Maharashtra   and   Ors.  as  reported at [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., as reported at (1980) 2  SCC 665.

6. In the result, the present application is allowed by directing that in  the   event   of  applicant  herein   being   arrested   pursuant   to   FIR  registered   at  C.R.No.   I   -   192   of   2016   with   Gandhidham   'A'  Division   Police   Station,   Kutch   (East),  the  applicant  shall   be  released   on   bail   on   furnishing   a   personal   bond   of  Rs.25,000/­  (Rupees  Twenty   Five   Thousand   only)  with   one   surety  of  like  amount on the following conditions:

(a)  shall   cooperate   with   the   investigation   and   make  himself  available for interrogation whenever required;
(b)  shall   remain   present   at   concerned   Police   Station   on  03.10.2018 between 11.00 a.m. 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 his residence till the final disposal of the case till  further orders;


     (f)    shall not leave  India  without  the  permission  of  the  Court 


                                     Page 3 of 4
               R/CR.MA/19882/2017                                              ORDER



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;

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.

9. Rule   is   made   absolute   to   the   aforesaid   extent.   Application   is  disposed of accordingly. Direct service is permitted.

(A.J.DESAI, J)  *F.S.KAZI......

Page 4 of 4