Gujarat High Court Case Information System
Print
CR.MA/9445/2011 3/ 3 ORDER
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
CRIMINAL
MISC.APPLICATION No. 9445 of 2011
=========================================================
ASHWANIKUMAR
CHETRAM BHARDWAJ - Applicant(s)
Versus
STATE
OF GUJARAT - Respondent(s)
=========================================================
Appearance :
MR
HARSHIT S TOLIA for
Applicant(s) : 1,MR PARTH S TOLIA for Applicant(s) : 1,
Ms.Manisha
L Shah, APP for Respondent(s) :
1,
=========================================================
CORAM
:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE ANANT S. DAVE
Date
: 21/07/2011
ORAL
ORDER
1. This
application under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for
short “the Code”) is preferred by the applicant-husband
against whom offences under Sections 304(B), 498(A), 504, 506(2) and
134 of Indian Penal Code have been registered with Veraval City
Police Station on 14.1.2011.
2. As
per allegations levelled in the complaint, daughter of the first
informant named Savita committed suicide as she was being harassed by
her husband and in-laws. In the complaint, in detail number of
instances have been given about physical and mental cruelty inflicted
upon her by in-laws and as a result Savita had committed suicide.
3. Shri
Tolia, learned counsel appearing for the applicant would submit that
allegations levelled in the FIR are false and baseless and have been
levelled to see that the applicant, a government servant serving with
Income Tax Department is punished for no fault of him, though he had
discharged all his marital duties to the best of his abilities. It is
further submitted that so far as investigation carried by the
Investigating Officer, no material surfaces on record which would
even reveal the involvement of the applicant prima facie in the crime
and so called telephonic conversation between the applicant and
complainant have no relevance at all. The applicant is Income Tax
Inspector and is not likely to flee from courts of justice. By
imposing suitable conditions, he may be granted anticipatory bail,
particularly, when other co-accused have been granted anticipatory
bail by the coordinate Bench of this Court by making certain prima
facie observations.
4. Learned
APP as well as learned advocate for the complainant have vehemently
opposed grant of anticipatory bail to the applicant-accused on the
ground that the complaint not only discloses the ingredients of the
offences but at the same time continuous and persistent physical and
mental torture inflicted upon the deceased wife which ultimately
resulted into registration of offences under Section 304(B), 498(A)
of Indian Penal Code and the applicant who is serving in Income Tax
Department is influential person and there are possibilities of his
tampering with the witnesses and evidence and, therefore, he may not
be granted anticipatory bail.
5. Considering
the over all facts and circumstances, nature of crime, punishment
prescribed and prima facie it cannot be said that the offences
registered against the applicant are based on baseless or vague
allegations and on the contrary reading of the complaint as a whole
would reveal that the deceased was subjected to mental and physical
torture from day one of her marriage with the applicant and from time
and again, such ill treatment to the victim continued and, therefore,
I am also of the opinion and in agreement with submissions of learned
counsel for the complainant and learned APP that grant of
anticipatory bail would amount likelihood of tampering with
investigation and possibility may not be ruled out of influencing the
witnesses or the record, since an attempt in the past is made of
making representation to the authority to come out of the
allegations in the FIR and a kind of defence is already created.
6. In
view of the above, this application is rejected.
(
Anant S Dave, J )
srilatha
Top