Gujarat High Court Case Information System
Print
CR.MA/14181/2011 4/ 4 ORDER
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
CRIMINAL
MISC.APPLICATION No. 14181 of 2011
=========================================
PATEL
SUNILBHAI DAHYALAL & 3 - Applicant(s)
Versus
STATE
OF GUJARAT - Respondent(s)
=========================================
Appearance :
MR
AD SHAH WITH MR. EKANT G AHUJA
for Applicant(s) : 1 -
4.
MS CHETNA M SHAH, LD. ADDL. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for Respondent(s)
: 1,
=========================================
CORAM
:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE Z.K.SAIYED
Date
: 14/11/2011
ORAL
ORDER
By
way of present application, filed under Section 439 of the Code of
Criminal Procedure, 1973, the applicants have prayed to release them
on regular bail in connection with CR No.I-209 of 2011 registered
with Kagdapith Police Station 365 read with Section 114 of the
Indian Penal Code.
Heard
Mr.A.D. Shah with Mr.Ekant Ahuja, learned counsel for the applicants
and Ms.C.M. Shah, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for
respondent-State.
Mr.Shah,
learned counsel for the applicants, has contended that the
victim-Thakorbhai Soni has to pay Rs.5.78 lacs to present
applicants-accused towards gold and silver ornaments purchased
through applicant No.2. Normally the victim used to pay 50% of the
total amount at the time of taking delivery and the remaining amount
was being paid by him within 2 to 3 days to applicant No.2. As the
outstanding amount was to the tune of Rs.5.78 lacs, applicant No.2
contacted the victim on his mobile for recovery of the amount.
Therefore, the victim sent three cheques of Rs.98,000/- each drawn
on Central Bank of India to applicant No.2, but, at the same time,
the victim also informed applicant No.2 to wait for some time as the
necessary funds arrangement could not be made. Relying on the
victim, applicant No.2 did not deposit the said cheques on 10th
August, 2011 and thereafter on 25th August, 2011.
However, as the amount is big, applicant No.2 persuade the victim
for making the payment. It is also contended by Mr.Shah, learned
counsel for the applicants, that after some time the victim even
stopped responding. Thereafter, upon inquiring, the victim was found
at S.T. Bus Stop of Ahmedabad and when the applicants asked the
victim as to why he was not paying the amount, the victim was not
properly answered and, therefore, the applicants took the victim to
his father. Mr.Shah, learned counsel for the applicants, has further
contended that the applicants were not used force or any coercion.
The victim himself gone with the applicants to his father’s house.
He was not kidnapped as per the say of the complainant. Mr.Shah
further contended that the victim has criminal antecedents. On the
contrary, the applicants are victimized by the victim. This is a
case of civil dispute. He has further contended that investigation
is also biased. The Investigating Officer has not properly carried
out the investigation. He has further contended that present
complaint is bogus and fabricated one. Just to avoid the payment,
present complaint is filed. The applicants are falsely implicated in
the alleged office. He, therefore, contended that looking to the
overall facts and circumstances of the case, applicants may kindly
be released on bail.
Ms.C.M.
Shah, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, has vehemently opposed
the present application. She has read the police papers and
contended that the applicants are involved in a serious case and
therefore, present application may not be entertained.
In
the facts and circumstances of the case and considering the nature
of allegations and role attributed to the applicants and without
entering into the merits of the case, prima facie, this Court is of
the opinion that this is a fit case to exercise the discretion to
enlarge the applicants on bail.
Hence,
the applicants are ordered to be released on bail in connection with
CR No.I-209 of 2011 registered with Kagdapith Police Station, for
the offence alleged against them in this application on their
executing a bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand only) each with
one solvent surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the
trial Court and subject to the conditions that they shall –
a) not
take undue advantage of their liberty or abuse their liberty;
b) not
to try to tamper or pressurise the prosecution witnesses or
complainant in any manner;
c) maintain
law and order and should cooperate the Investigating Officer;
d) not
act in a manner injurious to the interest of the prosecution;
e) not
leave the State of Gujarat without prior permission of the Sessions
Judge concerned;
f) mark
their presence before the Investigating Officer on every 15th
day of each English calendar month between 09.00 hours and 14.00
hours;
g) furnish
the address of their 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;
h) surrender
their passport, if any, to the lower Court within a week.
If
the breach of any of the above conditions is committed, the
concerned Court will be free to issue warrant or take appropriate
action in the matter.
Bail
before the lower Court having jurisdiction to try the case. It would
be open to the trial Court concerned to give time to furnish the
solvency certificate if prayed for. Rule is made absolute.
Direct
service is permitted.
(Z.
K. Saiyed, J)
Anup
Top