Gujarat High Court High Court

Mukesh vs State on 21 September, 2010

Gujarat High Court
Mukesh vs State on 21 September, 2010
Author: Rajesh H.Shukla,&Nbsp;
   Gujarat High Court Case Information System 

  
  
    

 
 
    	      
         
	    
		   Print
				          

  


	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	


 


	 

CR.MA/10025/2010	 3/ 3	ORDER 
 
 

	

 

IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
 

 


 

CRIMINAL
MISC.APPLICATION No. 10025 of 2010
 

 
 
=========================================
 

MUKESH
JAMNADAS GANWANI - Applicant(s)
 

Versus
 

STATE
OF GUJARAT - Respondent(s)
 

========================================= 
Appearance
: 
MR ANIL S
DAVE for
Applicant(s) : 1,MR MM TIRMIZI for Applicant(s) : 1, 
Ms MINI NAIR,
ADDL. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for Respondent(s) : 1, 
MRKJPANCHAL for
Complainant  
=========================================
 
	  
	 
	  
		 
			 

CORAM
			: 
			
		
		 
			 

HONOURABLE
			MR.JUSTICE RAJESH H.SHUKLA
		
	

 

 
 


 

Date
: 21/09/2010 

 

 
 
ORAL
ORDER

1. The present
application has been filed by the applicant for grant of regular bail
under sec. 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

2. The applicant-accused
is charged with having committed offences under sections 406, 409,
420, 465, 467, 468, 471, 477A, 120B of IPC and sec. 46 of the Banking
Regulation Act for which FIR, being C.R. No. I-10/2010, has been
registered with Gandhinagar Zone Police Station (Economic Cell).

3. Learned advocate Mr.
Anil Dave has shown willingness to make the payment and has tendered
a pay order/draft of Rs. 50,00,000/- to learned advocate Mr. Panchal,
which is accepted by him on instruction without prejudice to the
rights and contentions. Learned counsel Mr. Dave has also agreed to
make further payment in installments and has stated that he files an
undertaking of the petitioner for the schedule of payment which he
would abide by.

4. Learned advocate Mr.
Panchal has stated that this is without prejudice to the rights and
contentions and if any of the conditions stated in the undertaking
including default in making payment of the installments as stated in
the undertaking, it may be permitted to be treated as a ground for
cancellation of the bail.

5. Therefore,
considering the gesture made by the applicant along with the
undertaking filed today stating about the schedule of payment of
installments, the present application deserves to be allowed.

6. It
is clarified that if there is any default in payment of any of the
installments as stated in the undertaking of schedule, it would be
open for the bank to initiate appropriate proceedings including an
application for cancellation of the bail.

7. The application is
accordingly allowed. The applicant is ordered to be released on bail
in connection with C.R. No. I-10/2010 registered with Gandhinagar
Zone Police Station (Economic Cell) on his executing a personal bond
of Rs. 5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand only) with one solvent surety
for the like amount to the satisfaction of the lower court and
subject to the further conditions that he shall :

(a) not take undue
advantage of his liberty or abuse his liberty.

(b) not to try to tamper
or pressurize the prosecution witnesses or complainant in any manner;

(c ) not act in any
manner injurious to the interests of the prosecution.

(d) maintain law and
order and should co-operate with the investigating officers;

(e) mark his presence
before the concerned Police Station on the first Monday of every
calendar month between 11.00 am to 2.00 pm till the charge sheet is
filed.

(f) furnish the address
of his residence to the investigating officer and also to the court
at the time of execution of the bond and shall not change his
residence without prior permission of the court.

(g) surrender his
passport, if any, to the lower court, within a week.

7. If breach of any of
the above conditions is committed, the concerned Sessions Judge will
be free to issue warrant or take appropriate action in the matter.

8. Bail before the lower
court having jurisdiction to try the case. It would be open to the
trial court concerned to give time to furnish the solvency
certificate, if prayed for.

Rule is made absolute.

D.S. permitted.

(Rajesh H.

Shukla, J.)

(hn)

   

Top