Gujarat High Court High Court

Ranjitbhai vs State on 1 April, 2011

Gujarat High Court
Ranjitbhai vs State on 1 April, 2011
Author: Anant S. Dave,&Nbsp;
   Gujarat High Court Case Information System 

  
  
    

 
 
    	      
         
	    
		   Print
				          

  


	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	


 


	 

CR.MA/4573/2011	 3/ 3	ORDER 
 
 

	

 

IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
 

 


 

CRIMINAL
MISC.APPLICATION No. 4573 of 2011
 

 
=========================================================


 

RANJITBHAI
DHARAMSHIBHAI DESAI & 1 - Applicant(s)
 

Versus
 

STATE
OF GUJARAT - Respondent(s)
 

=========================================================
Appearance : 
MR
ASHISH M DAGLI for
Applicant(s) : 1 - 2. 
MR AJ DESAI, ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
for Respondent(s) :
1, 
=========================================================


 
	  
	 
	  
		 
			 

CORAM
			: 
			
		
		 
			 

HONOURABLE
			MR.JUSTICE ANANT S. DAVE
		
	

 

 
 


 

Date
: 01/04/2011 

 

 
 
ORAL
ORDER

RULE.

Learned APP Mr. A.J. Desai waives service of notice of Rule for the
respondent – State.

This
application is filed under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal
Procedure in connection with First Information Report registered as
I-C.R. No.258/2010 with Dabhoda Police Station, Gandhinagar for the
offences punishable under Sections 420, 465, 467, 468, 471, 114 and
120B of the Indian Penal Code.

Learned
Counsel for the applicants submits that the
co-accused has been enlarged on bail and the applicants are
similarly situated facing similar accusations and by imposing
suitable conditions, the applicants may be granted
anticipatory bail.

Heard
learned APP for the respondent-State.

Having
heard learned Counsels for the parties and perusing the record of
the case and taking into consideration the facts of the case, I am
inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the applicants. This Court
has also taken into consideration the law laid down by the Apex
Court in the case of Siddharam Stalingappa Mhetre v. State of
Maharashtra & Ors.
reported in [2011]1 SCC 694,
wherein the Apex Court reiterated the law laid down by the
Constitutional Bench in the case of Shri Gurubaksh Singh
Sibbia & Ors. reported in [1980]2 SCC 565.

Learned
Counsel for the parties do not press for further reasoned order.

In
the result, this application is allowed by directing that in the
event of the applicants herein being arrested pursuant to FIR being
I-C.R. No.258/2010 with Dabhoda Police Station, Gandhinagar, the
applicants shall be released on bail on furnishing a bond of
Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand Only) each with one surety of like
amount on following conditions :-

(a) shall cooperate with the
investigation and make themselves available for interrogation
whenever required;

(b) shall remain present at the
concerned Police Station on 6th
APRIL, 2011 between 11.00 am to 2.00 pm;

(c) shall not hamper the
investigation in any manner nor shall directly or indirectly make any
inducement, threat or promise to any witness so as to dissuade them
from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any Police Officer;

(d) shall at the time of
execution of bond, furnish the address to the Investigating Officer
and the Court concerned and shall not change the residence till the
final disposal of the case or till further orders;

(e) will not leave India without
the permission of the Court and, if is holding a Passport, shall
surrender the same before the trial Court immediately;

(f) It would be open to the
Investigating Officer to file an application for remand, if he
considers it just and proper and the concerned Magistrate would
decide it on merits.

(g) despite this order, it would
be open for the Investigating Agency to apply to the competent
Magistrate, for police remand of the applicants. The applicants
shall remain present before the learned Magistrate on the first date
of hearing of such an 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 applicants, 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.

Rule
made absolute. The application is disposed of accordingly.

Direct
Service is permitted.

Sd/-

(Anant
S. Dave, J.)

Caroline

   

Top