Gujarat High Court Case Information System
Print
CR.MA/1057620/2008 4/ 4 ORDER
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
CRIMINAL
MISC.APPLICATION No. 10576 of
2008
=========================================
METIBEN
W/O UDABHAI MOTIBHAI TURI (BAROT) - Applicant(s)
Versus
STATE
OF GUJARAT - Respondent(s)
=========================================
Appearance :
MR
MP PRAJAPATI for Applicant(s) : 1,
MR HL JANI,
APP for Respondent(s) : 1,
=========================================
CORAM
:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE H.B.ANTANI
Date
: 11/08/2008
ORAL ORDER
1. RULE.
Mr HL Jani, learned Additional Public Prosecutor waives service of
Rule on behalf of the State. In the facts and circumstances of the
case and by consent of both the sides, this matter is taken up for
hearing today.
2. 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 28
of 2008 registered with Vav (Tharad) Police Station, District
Banaskantha for the offences punishable under Sections 306, 498A and
114 of the IPC.
3. Mr
MP Prajapati, learned advocate for the petitioner submitted that the
petitioner is an old lady and she has been falsely involved in the
alleged commission of offence and therefore, it is a fit case to
release the petitioner on anticipatory bail. The learned advocate
for the petitioner submitted that even on perusal of the FIR at
Annexure-A to the petition, the petitioner cannot be said to have
been involved in the commission of offences punishable under Sections
306, 498A and 114 of the IPC and therefore, the prayer as set out in
the application may be granted.
4. Mr
HL Jani, learned Additional Public Prosecutor representing the State
submitted that considering the role attributed to the petitioner and
the manner in which the petitioner is alleged to have been involved
in the commission of offence punishable under Sections 306, 498A and
114 of the IPC, the application deserves to be dismissed.
5. I
have heard Mr MP Prajapati, learned advocate for the petitioner and
Mr HL Jani, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State at
length and in great detail. I have also perused the averments made
in the petition and the FIR at Anenxure-A to the petition. The
petitioner has been booked for the offences punishable under Sections
306, 498A and 114 of the IPC. Considering the role played by the
petitioner and the manner in which the alleged offence is committed
by the petitioner along with the other accused persons, I am inclined
to exercise my discretion in favour of the petitioner without
entering into merits of the case.
6. In
the event of arrest of the petitioner in connection with FIR bearing
CR No. I 28 of 2008 registered with Vav (Tharad) Police Station
for the offences punishable under Sections 306, 498A and 114 of the
IPC, she shall be released on bail on executing a bond of Rs.10,000/-
[Rupees ten thousand only] with one surety of the like amount on the
following conditions that she shall:
[a] co-operate
with the investigation and make herself available for interrogation
whenever required.
[b] shall
remain present at the concerned Police Station on 20th
August 2008 between 9.00 AM to 3.00 PM.
[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 her 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 a
passport, she 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;
7. 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.
8. This
order will hold good, if the petitioner is 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 her arrest.
Thereafter, it will be open to the petitioner to make a fresh
application for being enlarged on bail in usual course, which, 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.
9. With
these directions, this petition is allowed.
Rule
is made absolute. Direct Service is permitted.
[H.B.
Antani, J.]
mrpandya*
Top