Gujarat High Court Case Information System
Print
CR.MA/1021920/2008 1/ 3 ORDER
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
CRIMINAL
MISC.APPLICATION No. 10219 of
2008
=========================================
RITESH
BALKRISHNA PATEL - Applicant(s)
Versus
STATE
OF GUJARAT - Respondent(s)
=========================================
Appearance :
MR
DIVYESH A JOSHI for Applicant(s) : 1,MR RUSHABH R
SHAH for Applicant(s) : 1,
MS MANISHA SHAH, APP for Respondent(s)
: 1,
=========================================
CORAM
:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE H.B.ANTANI
Date
: 12/08/2008
ORAL ORDER
1. RULE.
Ms Manisha Shah, 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 53
of 2006 registered with Navapura Police Station for the offences
punishable under Sections 467, 468, 420, 120B and 114 of the IPC.
3. Mr
Divyesh Joshi, learned advocate for the petitioner submitted that
considering the averments made in the petition and the FIR at
Annexure-A to the petition, it is a fit case to grant anticipatory
bail. The learned advocate for the petitioner submitted that if the
prayer as set out in the application is granted, the petitioner would
abide by the terms and conditions imposed by this Court.
4. Ms
Manisha Shah, learned Additional Public Prosecutor representing the
State submitted that considering the role attributed to the
petitioner which is reflected in the FIR at Annexure-A to the
petition and the manner in which the offences are committed by the
petitioner, the petition deserves to be rejected.
5. Having
considered the rival submissions and on perusal of the FIR at
Annexure-A to the petition, the petitioner is booked for the offences
punishable under Sections 467, 468, 420, 120B and 114 of the IPC. In
view of the above facts and circumstances of the case and without
entering into merits of the case, I am inclined to exercise my
discretion in favour of the petitioner.
6. In
the event of arrest of the petitioner in connection with CR No. I 53
of 2006 registered with Navapura Police Station for the offences
punishable under Sections 467, 468, 420, 120B and 114 of the IPC, he
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 he shall:
[a] co-operate
with the investigation and make himself available for interrogation
whenever and wherever 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 his 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, he 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 his 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