Gujarat High Court High Court

Baldevji vs State Of on 28 January, 2011

Gujarat High Court
Baldevji vs State Of on 28 January, 2011
Author: Akil Kureshi,&Nbsp;
   Gujarat High Court Case Information System 

  
  
    

 
 
    	      
         
	    
		   Print
				          

  


	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	


 


	 

CR.MA/452/2011	 2/ 2	ORDER 
 
 

	

 


IN THE HIGH
COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
 


 


 


CRIMINAL
MISC.APPLICATION No.452 of 2011
 


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

 


BALDEVJI
MAGANJI THAKOR & 4 - Applicant(s)
 


Versus
 


STATE OF
GUJARAT - Respondent(s)
 


=========================================================
 
Appearance
: 
MR
AB GATESHANIYA for
Applicant(s) : 1 - 5. 
PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for Respondent(s) :
1, 
=========================================================


 
	  
	 
	  
		 
			 

CORAM
			: 
			
		
		 
			 

HONOURABLE
			MR.JUSTICE AKIL KURESHI
		
	

 


Date :
28/01/2011 

 


ORAL ORDER

Applicants
are the original accused Nos.2 and 3, they seeks anticipatory bail
in connection with FIR bearing C.R. I-246/2010 registered at Adalaj
Police Station,
Dist. Gandhinagar. In the said FIR the complainant has made serious
allegations of fraud and forgery in land deal. It is stated, inter
alia, that the applicants along with other co-accused have sold his
land, for which they have no right, title or interest, knowing fully
well that the land is already sold over to the grandfather of the
complainant, only because the land price is appreciated multi fold,
presently the price could be assessed at Rs.5 crores, they executed
another document in favour of accused No.8 by showing the sale
consideration of Rs.24 lac only.

In
face of such serious allegations, I am of the opinion that custodial
interrogation of the applicants would be necessary. Counsel for the
applicants, however, vehemently contended that it is purely civil
dispute and anticipatory bail should be granted to the applicants. He
relied upon a decision of the Apex Court in case of Ravindra
Saxena Vs. State of Rajasthan, 2010 (1) G.L.H. 382 and in
particular on the observations made in Paragraph No.11, which read as
under:

“11. In
our opinion, the High Court erred in not considering the application
for anticipatory bail in
accordance with law.

The defence put forward
by the appellant cannot be obliterated at this stage itself. We are
also of the opinion, that the submission of the learned Counsel for
the appellant that the dispute herein is purely of a civil nature
cannot be brushed aside at this stage. We, therefore, grant
anticipatory bail to the
appellant in the case pending on the basis of FIR No.107/2007
registered at Police Station
Vidhyadhar Nagar, Jaipur City under Section 420, 467, 468, 120-B IPC
now pending only under Section 420 and 120-B IPC. It is directed that
in the event of arrest the appellant shall be released on bail to the
satisfaction of the Investigating Officer. It is also directed that
the appellant shall join investigation as and when required.”

In
the present case, however, it cannot be stated that the dispute is
one of the purely civil nature. The complainant has alleged certain
acts on the part of the accused, including the present applicants,
which would disclose penal offence.

Under
the circumstances, the application is dismissed.

Sd/-

[AKIL
KURESHI, J]

***

Bhavesh*

   

Top