Gujarat High Court Case Information System
Print
CR.MA/7764/2010 2/ 3 ORDER
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
CRIMINAL
MISC.APPLICATION No. 7764 of 2010
=========================================================
PRASHANT
MANEKLAL MEHTA & 1
Versus
STATE
OF GUJARAT
=========================================================
Appearance
:
MR
PR NANAVATI for
Applicants
MR UA TRIVEDI ADDL. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for
Respondent
=========================================================
CORAM
:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE Z.K.SAIYED
Date
: 28/07/2010
ORAL
ORDER
In the
facts and circumstances of the case and by consent of both the sides,
this matter is taken up for hearing today.
This is an
application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of
Criminal Procedure in connection with the FIR bearing CR No. I 71
of 2010 registered with Harij Police Station, District : Patan for
the offences punishable under Sections 379, 467 and 120B of the
Indian Penal Code.
Mr.P. R.
Nanavati, learned advocate for the applicants submitted that the
applicants are innocent persons and have not committed any offence as
alleged in the FIR and they have been wrongly arraigned in the
commission of the offence. He submitted that both the applicants are
business men both are paying income tax in their individual capacity
as well as of their firms. He submitted that the muddamals were
recovered by by police from the factory of the applicants. He
submitted that no doubt some number plats were also recovered, but
for the custodial interrogation, the police can apply before the
lower Court for remand. In view of the aforesaid facts and
circumstances of the case, it is a fit case to release the present
applicants on anticipatory bail.
Mr.U. A.
Trivedi, learned Additional Public Prosecutor representing the State
submitted that the muddamals were recovered from the factory of the
applicants and they may be involved in serious offence also. He
submitted that considering the role attributed to the applicants
which is reflected in the FIR at Annexure-A to the application and
the nature of offences in which the applicants are involved as well
as the manner in which the offences are committed by the applicants,
the application deserves to be rejected.
Having
considered the rival submissions and on perusal of the FIR at
Annexure-A to the application, the applicants are booked for the
offences punishable under Sections 379, 467 and 120B of the Indian
Penal Code. In view of the above facts and circumstances of the case
and without entering into merits of the case, I am inclined to
exercise my discretion in favour of the applicant.
In the
event of arrest of the applicants in connection with CR No. I 71
of 2010 registered with Harij Police Station, District : Patan for
the offences punishable under Sections 379, 467 and 120B of the
Indian Penal Code, they shall be released on bail on executing a
bond of Rs.5,000/- each [Rupees five thousand only] with one surety
of the like amount on the following conditions that they shall:
[a] co-operate
with the investigation and make themselves available for
interrogation whenever and wherever required.
[b] shall
remain present at the concerned Police Station on 30.7.2010 at
11:00 a.m.
[c] shall
not hamper the investigation in any manner nor shall directly or
indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person
acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade them from
disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer;
[d] at the
time of execution of bond, furnish their residential 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] not
leave India without the permission of the Court and, if holding
passports, they shall surrender the same before the Trial Court
within a week;
[f] not
obstruct or hamper the police investigation and not play mischief
with the evidence collected or yet to be collected by the police;
It would
be open to the Investigating Officer to file an application for
remand if he considers it proper and just; and the competent Court
would decide it on merits.
This order
will hold good, if the applicants are arrested at any time 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 his arrest.
Thereafter, it will be open to the applicants to make a fresh
application for being enlarged on bail in usual course, when it comes
up before the competent Court, will be decided in accordance with
law, having regard to all the attending circumstances and the
materials available at the relevant time, without being influenced by
the fact that anticipatory bail was granted.
With these
directions, this application is allowed. Rule is made absolute.
Direct Service is permitted.
(Z.K.SAIYED,
J.)
(vijay)
Top