Gujarat High Court Case Information System
Print
CR.MA/11995/2008 4/ 4 ORDER
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
CRIMINAL
MISC.APPLICATION No. 11995 of 2008
=========================================================
PARSHOTTAMBHAI
MAGANBHAI PRAJAPATI - Applicant(s)
Versus
STATE
OF GUJARAT - Respondent(s)
=========================================================
Appearance
:
MR
MP SHAH for
Applicant(s) : 1,MS. KRUTI M SHAH for Applicant(s) : 1,
MR.
M.R.MENGDEY ADDL. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for Respondent(s) :
1,
=========================================================
CORAM
:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE M.R. SHAH
Date
: 19/09/2008
ORAL
ORDER
1. RULE.
Mr. M.R. Mengdey, learned Additional Public Prosecutor
waives service of rule on behalf of the respondent.
2. This
is an application for anticipatory bail under section 438 of the Code
of Criminal Procedure in connection with a criminal complaint being
C.R. No. I-129 of 2008 registered with Chhotaudepur Police Station
for offence punishable under Section 409 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. Heard
Ms.K.M. Shah, earned advocate for the applicant and Mr.M.R. Mengdey,
learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
4. Ms.
Kruti Shah, learned advocate for the applicant has submitted that
considering the role attributed to the applicant and more
particularly, it is the case of temporary misappropriation and entire
amount was deposited, even so reflected in the complaint, it is a
fit case of granting the anticipatory bail. She has further submitted
that applicant is ready and willing to cooperate with the
investigation.
5. Shri
M.R. Mengdey, learned APP while opposing the present application has
submitted that the applicant has might have deposited the amount but
still it is a case of temporary misappropriation, therefore, the
applicant does not deserves the discretionary relief.
6. Having
heard the learned advocates appearing on behalf of the respective
parties and considering the facts and circumstances of the case, more
particularly, when the amount is already deposited long back, even
prior to the complaint and there are no possibility of tampering
with the evidence and / or witnesses, I am inclined to grant
anticipatory bail to the applicant.
7. For
the foregoing reasons, the petition is allowed. In the event of
arrest of the petitioner in connection with C.R. No.I-129 of 2008
registered with Chhotaudepur Police Station, he shall be
released on bail on him executing a bond of Rs.10,000/- [Rupees Ten
Thousand Only] with one surety of the like amount on the following
conditions that he 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 23/9/2008 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 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 a
passport, they shall surrender the same before the Trial Court within
a week; and,
[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 petitioners 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 their
arrest. Thereafter, it will be open to the petitioners 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.
Rule
is made absolute. Direct Service is permitted.
[M.R. SHAH, J.]
kaushik
Top