Gujarat High Court Case Information System
Print
CR.MA/1483/2011 4/ 4 ORDER
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
CRIMINAL
MISC.APPLICATION No. 1483 of 2011
=========================================================
AATUBHAI
MANGABHAI MAKWANA - Applicant(s)
Versus
STATE
OF GUJARAT - Respondent(s)
=========================================================
Appearance
:
MR
GAJENDRA P BAGHEL for
Applicant(s) : 1,
MR DC SEJPAL, APP for Respondent(s) : 1,
MR
AB MUNSHI for Respondent(s) :
1,
=========================================================
CORAM
:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE AKIL KURESHI
Date
: 14/02/2011
ORAL
ORDER
1. Petitioner
is original accused No.4. He seeks anticipatory bail in connection
with FIR bearing C.R.No.I-135 of 2010 registered at Kamrej Police
Station.
2. Counsel
for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has no criminal
antecedents. He would cooperate with the investigation if released.
He drew my attention to the allegations made in the complaint which
essentially amount to misuse of fabricated power of attorney for
selling of land of the complainant in favour of accused No.3. He
submitted that the said accused has been granted regular bail by this
court by order dated 25.10.10.
3. On
the other hand, learned APP Shri Sejpal and learned advocate Shri
Munshi for the original complainant submitted that against the order
granting regular bail to original accused No.3, application for
cancellation of bail has been moved before the Apex Court which is
pending. They also submitted that the petitioner has not been
available for interrogation.
4. As
per the complaint, the petitioner is a person in whose favour the
alleged fabricated power of attorney has been created which has been
used for the purpose of sale of land of the complainant in favour of
accused No.3. Accused No.3 has been released on bail. Further, the
FIR itself suggests that the power of attorney was created on blank
papers on which accused No.3 had forced the complainant to put his
thumb impression. The complainant does not deny his thumb impression
on the power of attorney. I further find that the alleged incident
of accused No.3 compelling the complainant to put his thumb
impression on blank papers is of 13.10.2006 while the FIR was lodged
on 1.8.2010.
5. Considering
the above aspects of the matter, the petitioner is ordered to be
released on bail in the event of his arrest in connection with
C.R.No.I-135 of 2010 of Kamrej Police Station upon his furnishing
bond of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand) with one surety
of like amount to the satisfaction of the lower Court and subject to
the following conditions that he:
[A] shall
cooperate with the investigation and make himself available for
interrogation whenever required.
[B] shall
remain present at concerned Police Station on 18th
February 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 petitioner. The
petitioner shall remain present before the learned Magistrate on the
first date of hearing of such 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 petitioner,
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 accordingly.
Direct
service is permitted.
(Akil
Kureshi, J.)
(vjn)
Top