Sunil Deepakkumar Agrawal vs State Of Gujarat & on 19 November, 2014

[Cites 3, Cited by 1]

Gujarat High Court

Sunil Deepakkumar Agrawal vs State Of Gujarat & on 19 November, 2014

Bench: A.J.Desai

       R/CR.MA/15636/2014                                ORDER



         IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR REGULAR BAIL) NO. 15636 of 2014

================================================================
              SUNIL DEEPAKKUMAR AGRAWAL....Applicant
                             Versus
                STATE OF GUJARAT & 1....Respondents
================================================================
Appearance:
MR RR MARSHALL, LD.SENIOR COUNSEL WITH MR AB MUNSHI,
ADVOCATE for the Applicant.
MR NJ SHAH, LD.ADDL.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for the Respondent No.1 -
State of Gujarat.
MR DEVANG VYAS, LD.ASSISSTANT SOLICITOR GENERAL OF INDIA for
respondent No.2.
================================================================

        CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.J.DESAI

                            Date : 19/11/2014


                             ORAL ORDER

1. The present application is filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for regular bail in connection with an offence being C.R.No.I- 16 of 2014 registered with DCB Police Station, Surat.

2. Mr.R.R.Marshall, learned Senior Counsel appearing with Mr.A.B.Munshi, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the applicant submits that considering the nature of offence, the applicant may be enlarged on regular bail by imposing suitable conditions.

3. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the respondent-State has opposed grant of regular Page 1 of 4 R/CR.MA/15636/2014 ORDER bail looking to the nature and gravity of the offence.

4. Mr.Devang Vyas, learned Assistant Solicitor General of India, states that since the property issued under Prevention of Money Laundering Act,2002, respondent No.2 lodged a case before the Learned District and Sessions Judge, Ahmedabad (Rural) being PMLA Case Complaint No.3 of 2014 against some of the accused, who are also accused in the present case.

5. I have heard Mr.R.R.Marshall, learned Senior Counsel appearing with Mr.A.B.Munshi, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the applicant; Mr.Devang Vyas, learned Assistant Solicitor General of India appearing for respondent No.2 and Mr.N.J.Shah, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent No.1 - State of Gujarat.

I have perused the papers of investigation and considered the allegations levelled against the applicant and the role played by the applicant in both the cases and statement of witnesses. I have also considered the fact that investigation is over and charge-sheet is filed and the applicant is behind the bar since 23/05/2014. This Court has also taken into consideration the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Sanjay Chandra versus Central Bureau of Investigation reported in (2012)1 SCC 40.

6. Learned advocates appearing on behalf of the respective parties do not press for further reasoned order.

7. In the facts and circumstances of the case and Page 2 of 4 R/CR.MA/15636/2014 ORDER considering the nature of allegations made against the applicant in the FIR, without discussing the evidence in detail, prima facie, this Court is of the opinion that this is a fit case to exercise the discretion and enlarge the applicant on regular bail. Hence, the present application is allowed and the applicant is ordered to be released on regular bail in connection with an offence being C.R.No.I- 16 of 2014 registered with DCB Police Station, Surat, on executing a personal bond of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lac only) with two sureties of Rs.50,000/- each to the satisfaction of the learned 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 injuries to the interest of the prosecution;

[c] surrender passport, if any, to the lower court within a week;

[d] not leave the State of Gujarat without prior permission of the Sessions Judge concerned; [e] mark presence before the concerned Police Station on alternate Monday for a period of three months and thereafter on any day of first week of each English calendar month for one year, between 10:00 a.m. and 2:00 p.m.;

[f] furnish latest address of residence to the Investigating Officer and also to the Court at the time of execution of the bond and shall not change the residence without prior permission of this Court;

Page 3 of 4

R/CR.MA/15636/2014 ORDER

8. 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 learned 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. At the trial, learned Trial Court shall not be influenced by the observations of preliminary nature, qua the evidence at this stage, made by this Court while enlarging the applicant on bail. Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent.

Direct service is permitted.

[A.J.DESAI,J.] *dipti Page 4 of 4

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Gujarat High Court