Gujarat High Court Case Information System
Print
CR.MA/6238/2010 5/ 5 ORDER
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
CRIMINAL
MISC.APPLICATION No. 6238 of 2010
======================================
LALSING
VAJABHAI PARGI & 1 - Applicant(s)
Versus
STATE
OF GUJARAT - Respondent(s)
======================================
Appearance
:
MR
MA KHARADI for Applicant(s) : 1 - 2.
MR MG NANAVATY, ADDL.PUBLIC
PROSECUTOR for Respondent(s) :
1,
======================================
CORAM
:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE S.R.BRAHMBHATT
Date
: 17/06/2010
ORAL
ORDER
1. Rule.
Shri M.G. Nanavaty, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, waives
service of notice on behalf of respondent-State. With the consent of
the parties rule is fixed forthwith.
2. The
applicants have approached this Court under Section 438 of Criminal
Procedure Code for seeking anticipatory bail in view of the fact that
they have been named as accused in CR-I-No.27/2010 registered with
Santrampur Police Station for offence punishable under Sections 306
and 114 of the Indian Penal Code, wherein the complainant has made a
statement that step-son of accused No.2 is said to have committed
suicide on account of cruelty and torture meted out to him by the
accused Nos.1 and 2.
3. This
Court is of the view that the complainant’s version deserves to be
viewed in a proper perspective as it would not be appropriate for
this Court to elaborately dwell upon the fine aspects touching the
matter of investigation and trial but suffice it, at this stage, to
say that deceased boy was to appear in the repeat SSC examination
indicating that the boy was in fact studying. The factum of torture,
so as to invoke Section 306 in such circumstances, will have to be
viewed in its proper perspective. The Court is, therefore, inclined
to exercise discretion in favour of his parents of whom one is a
step-parent. In case they are arrested, they will be enlarged on bail
on the appropriate terms and conditions.
4. The
applicants-accused moved the application being Criminal Misc.
Application No. 369 of 2010 before the concerned Sessions Court,
which came to be rejected on 9.6.2010.
5. This
Court has perused the FIR and role attributed to the present
applicants. Looking to the averments in the complaint and after
hearing learned counsel for the parties, this Court is of the
considered view that anticipatory bail deserves to be granted to the
applicants for the following reasons :
(i) The
role attributed to the present applicants in the FIR itself deserves
to be taken into consideration for granting this application.
(ii) The
counsel for the applicants has assured this Court that the applicants
would cooperate in the investigation in case this application is
granted.
6. This
application therefore deserves to be allowed and is accordingly
allowed on the following conditions as under:
That
in the event of arrest of the applicants in connection with
CR-I-No.27/2010 registered with Santrampur Police Station,
they shall be released on anticipatory bail in respect of the
offences alleged against them in this application, on they executing
a bond of Rs.5,000=00 (Rs. Five thousand only) each with one surety
each of the like amount, by the concerned Police Officer and on
conditions that they shall;
(a)
remain present before the Trial Court regularly as and when
directed on the dates fixed;
(b)
appear before the concerned Police Station, on 24.6.2010 between
9.00 am and 2.00 p.m.
(c)
make themselves available for interrogation by the police officer
whenever and wherever required;
(d)
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 or her from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any
police officer;
(e)
not to obstruct or hamper the police investigation and not to play
mischief with the evidence collected or yet to be collected by the
police;
(f)
at the time of execution of bond, furnish the address to the
Investigating Officer and the Court concerned and shall not change
their residence till the final disposal of the case or till further
orders;
(g)
not leave Gujarat State without the prior permission of the Court
and, if having passport, shall deposit the same before the Trial
Court within a week.
7. It
would be open to the Investigating Officer to file an application for
remand, if he considers it proper and just, and the concerned
Magistrate would decide it on merits.
8. This
order will hold good if the applicants are arrested at anytime within
90 days from today. The order for release on bail will remain
operative only for a period of ten days from the date of their
arrest. Thereafter, it will be open to the applicants to make a fresh
application for being enlarged on bail in usual course which when it
comes before the competent Court, will be disposed of in accordance
with law, having regard to all the attending circumstances and the
materials available at the relevant time, un-influenced by the fact
that anticipatory bail was granted.
9. Rule
made absolute. Direct service permitted.
(S.R.
Brahmbhatt, J. )
sudhir
Top