Gujarat High Court Case Information System
Print
CR.MA/1310/2010 1/ 4 ORDER
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
CRIMINAL
MISC.APPLICATION No. 1310 of 2010
=========================================================
MAHESHBHAI
AMRATBHAI NAYAKA - Applicant(s)
Versus
STATE
OF GUJARAT - Respondent(s)
=========================================================
Appearance :
MR
JB PARDIWALA for
Applicant(s) : 1,
MS. KRINA CALLA, APP for Respondent(s) :
1,
=========================================================
CORAM
:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE H.B.ANTANI
Date
: 22/02/2010
ORAL
ORDER
1. This
is an application preferred under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal
Procedure, 1973 by the applicant for regular bail, who has been
arrested, in connection with F.I.R. registered as C.R. No.- I-218 of
2009 with Vapi Town Police Station for the offence punishable under
Sections 467, 468, 471 and 114 of the Indian Penal Code.
2. Learned
Advocate for the applicant submitted that the applicant is an
innocent person and false case is foisted on him punishable under
Sections 467, 468, 471 and 114 of the Indian Penal Code. He further
submitted that even the basic ingredients of Section 467, 468 and
471 are not attracted in the present case. Considering the role
attributed to the applicant which is reflected in the F.I.R. at
Annexure-A to the application as well as the documents produced in
the present case, he deserves to be enlarged on bail.
3. Learned
A.P.P. Ms. Krina Calla representing the State, while opposing the
bail application, submitted that the applicant is the main culprit
and he is involved in a serious offence punishable under Sections
467, 468, 471 and 114 of the Indian Penal Code. Considering the role
played by the applicant which is reflected in the F.I.R. at
Annexure-A to the application and the manner in which the offence is
committed by him, no discretionary relief be granted to the applicant
and the application deserved to be dismissed.
4. I
have heard learned Advocate Mr. J.B. Pardiwala appearing for the
applicant and learned A.P.P. Ms. Krina Calla appearing for the State
at length and in great detail. I have considered the rival
submissions, averments made in the application, role attributed to
the applicant which is reflected in F.I.R. at Annexure-A to the
application, provisions of Sections 467, 468, 471 and 114 of the
Indian Penal Code, quantum of punishment etc. and the fact that the
two other accused out of three have already been released by the
Trial Court. Even on the ground of parity and considering the fact
that the entire case is based on documentary evidence, I am of the
view that the applicant deserves to be enlarged on bail in the
peculiar facts and circumstances of the case without discussing the
evidence in detail.
5. For
the foregoing reasons, the application is allowed and the applicant
is ordered to be enlarged on bail in connection with C.R. No.- I-218
of 2009 registered at Vapi Town Police Station on executing a bond of
Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand only) with one surety of the like
amount to the satisfaction of the Trial Court and subject to the
conditions that he shall:
(a) not
take undue advantage of his liberty or abuse his liberty;
(b) not
act in a manner injurious to the interest of the prosecution;
(c) surrender
his passport, if any, to the lower court within a week.
(d) not
leave the State of Gujarat without the prior permission of the
Sessions Court concerned;
(e) mark
his presence twice in a month at the concerned Police Station on 1st
and 15th of English calendar month between 9.00 AM
and 2.00 PM. till the trial is over;
(f) furnish
the present address of his residence to the I.O. and also to the
Court at the time of execution of the bond and shall not change
his residence without prior permission of this Court;
(g) maintain
law and order.
6. If
breach of any of the above conditions is committed, the Sessions
Judge concerned will be free to issue warrant or to take appropriate
action in the matter.
7. Bail
bond to be executed before the lower Court having jurisdiction to try
the case.
8. At
the trial, the Trial Court shall not be influenced by the
observations of preliminary nature, qua the evidence at this stage,
made by this Court while enlarging the applicant on bail.
9. Rule
is made absolute to the aforesaid extent. Direct Service is
permitted.
(H.B.ANTANI,J.)
Shekhar
Top