Gujarat High Court Case Information System
Print
CR.MA/5313/2011 3/ 3 ORDER
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
CRIMINAL
MISC.APPLICATION No. 5313 of 2011
=========================================================
RAMESHBHAI
GANGARAMBHAI PATEL - Applicant(s)
Versus
STATE
OF GUJARAT - Respondent(s)
=========================================================
Appearance
:
MR
TEJAS P SATTA for
Applicant(s) : 1,
MR LB DABHI APP for Respondent(s) :
1,
=========================================================
CORAM
:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE K.M.THAKER
Date
: 09/05/2011
ORAL
ORDER
1. Heard
Mr.Tejas Satta, learned advocate for the applicant and Mr.Dabhi,
learned APP for respondent State.
2 This
application seeking regular bail under Section 439 of the Code of
Criminal Procedure, 1973 has been preferred by applicant in
connection with the offence registered with Mehsana
City Police Station being M.Case
No.1 of 2011 for the offences punishable under sections 406, 420,
415, 416, 465, 466, 467, 468, 471, 474, 114 and 120(B) of Indian
Penal Code.
3.
Mr.Satta, learned advocate for the applicant submitted that brother
of the applicant viz. Babubhai Gangaram Patel was co-purchaser of the
plot in question, along with the present applicant. He submitted that
the notice under section 135(d) of the Bombay Land Revenue Code was
also issued and thereafter the transaction took place. It is
submitted that since subsequently prices of the land have escalated,
the complaint has been preferred. He has also submitted that
applicant is bona fide purchaser.
He has also referred to the sale-deed in support of his submission.
He has referred to the order dated 11th
April, 2011 vide which the brother of the applicant has been granted
anticipatory bail passed in
Criminal Misc.Application No.5013 of 2011. He, therefore, submitted
that, on the ground of parity, the present applicant may also be
released on bail.
4.
Mr.Dabhi, learned APP has opposed the bail application and relied
upon the statement of Talati who submitted that applicant with an old
lady had come and requested that the lady was the landlord, hence her
signature on notice under section 135(d) of the Code may be taken.
Thus, the applicant and other persons have tried to commit fraud with
the landlord, and, therefore, present applicant may not be enlarged
on bail.
5. Having
heard the learned counsel for both the sides and considering the
facts and circumstances of the case as well as the documents and
other material produced on record of this case, the gravity of the
offence, the quantum of punishment, the allegations against the
applicant, the manner in which the applicant is allegedly involved in
the case as per the allegation of the prosecution, coupled with the
fact that the co-accused has been released by this Court vide order
dated 11th
April, 2011, I am of the view that the applicant deserves to be
released on bail.
6.
For the foregoing reasons, the application is allowed and
the applicant is ordered to be enlarged on regular bail in connection
with M.Case No.1 of 2011 registered at Mehsana City Police Station on
executing a bond of Rs.15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Thousand Only) with
two sureties 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]
maintain law and order;
[d]
not leave the State of Gujarat without the prior permission of the
Sessions Court concerned;
[e]
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;
[f]
surrender his passport, if any, to the lower Court within a week;
[g]
mark his presence at the concerned Police Station on 13th
May, 2011 and thereafter on
any 1st and 15th day of English
calender month between 9.00 AM and 2.00 PM till the trial is over;
7.
The authorities will release the applicant only if he is not
required in any other offence for the time being.
8.
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.
9.
Bail bond to be executed before the lower Court having
jurisdiction to try the case.
10.
At the trial, the Trial Court shall not be influenced by the
observations of prima facie nature, qua the evidence at this
stage, made by this Court while enlarging the petitioner on bail.
11.
Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent. Direct Service is
permitted.
(K.M.THAKER,
J.)
Amit
Top