Gujarat High Court Case Information System
Print
CR.MA/177820/2009 7/ 7 ORDER
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
CRIMINAL
MISC.APPLICATION No. 1778 of
2009
=========================================================
VAGHARI
KANVARBHAI TALSIBHAI - Applicant(s)
Versus
STATE
OF GUJARAT - Respondent(s)
=========================================================
Appearance
:
MR
PRATIK B BAROT for
Applicant(s) : 1,
MR LB DABHI ADDL. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for
Respondent(s) :
1,
=========================================================
CORAM
:
HON'BLE
SMT. JUSTICE ABHILASHA KUMARI
Date
: 25/03/2009
ORAL
ORDER
1. Rule.
Mr. L.B. Dabhi, learned Additional Public Prosecutor waives service
of notice of Rule on behalf of the respondent-State of Gujarat.
2. This
application has been filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal
Procedure, 1973, for grant of bail in connection with FIR, being
I-C.R. No. 92 of 2008, registered at Radhanpur Police Station, for
offences punishable under Sections 363, 366, 376 and 506(1), of the
Indian Penal Code.
3. The
allegation contained in the FIR is that the applicant is involved in
the commission of the above-mentioned offences.
4. Mr.
P.B. Barot, learned Advocate for the applicant has submitted that the
applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the
commission of the alleged offence. That, the contents of the FIR, on
the face of it, do not reveal that the applicant is involved in the
commission of the offence, as alleged, as the prosecutrix-herself,
insisted upon accompanying the applicant, as the boy, to whom she was
going to be engaged, was not liked by her. That, the prosecutrix had
voluntarily gone with the applicant. That, the prosecutrix is about
19 years of age and not 16 years of age, as is being alleged, which
is evident from the document produced at Page-25 of the application.
That, the prosecutrix herself, has addressed a communication dated
31.05.2008, to the Investigating Officer, and has stated that she had
voluntarily left her house and wants to marry the applicant. That,
the prosecutrix has remained in the company of the applicant for a
considerable period of time and, therefore, it cannot be said that
the applicant is involved in the commission of the offences mentioned
above and, therefore, the application for bail may be favorably
considered.
5. Mr.
L.B. Dabhi, learned APP on behalf of the respondent-State has
strongly opposed the grant of bail to the applicant.
6. I
have considered the submissions made by the learned Counsel for the
respective parties, and perused the contents of the FIR as well as
other material on record. The material on record, prima facie, does
not point out the direct involvement of the applicant in the
commission of the offence, in the manner alleged. It, further,
transpires that there appears to be a possibility that the
prosecutrix may have voluntarily left her house, and has asked the
applicant to take her away, as she did not like the boy, to whom she
was going to be engaged. The investigation is over and the
charge-sheet has now been filed and, therefore, there is no
possibility that the applicant will abscond, tamper with the evidence
or pressurize the witnesses. Considering the totality of
the facts and circumstances of the case, as emerging from the
material on record, the manner in which the offence is alleged to
have taken place and the nature and gravity of the offence, the
application deserves to be allowed.
7. For
the reasons stated above, the
application is allowed. The applicant is ordered to be released on
bail in connection with FIR, being I-C.R. No. 92 of 2008 registered
with Radhanpur Police Station, on his executing a personal bond to
the tune of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand Only), with one solvent
surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court and
subject to the conditions that the applicant:
a) shall
not take undue advantage of his liberty or abuse his liberty in any
manner;
b) shall
not act in a manner injurious to the interest of the prosecution
or tamper with evidence or intimidate witnesses;
c)
shall maintain law and order and shall cooperate fully with the
investigating officers and shall make himself available for
investigation, as and whenever directed;
d) shall
mark his presence before the Investigating Officer of the concerned
Police Station on the 15th and 30th day of
every English calendar month, between 10:00 am to
5:00 pm, till the commencement of trial;
e) shall
not leave the local limits of the State of Gujarat without the
prior permission of the concerned Sessions Judge;
f) shall
furnish his residential address to the Investigating Officer and
also to the court at the time of execution of the bond and shall
not change his residential address without prior permission of
this Court;
g) shall
surrender his Passport, if any, to the lower Court within a week.
8. If
the applicant commits breach of any of the above conditions, the
concerned Sessions Judge will be free to issue warrants or take
appropriate action in the matter.
9. It
is made clear that no observations made by this Court be construed as
having any bearing on the merits of the case, at the time of the
trial. The trial Court will proceed in accordance with law,
unaffected and uninfluenced by any observations contained in this
order.
10. 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.
11. Rule
is made absolute. Direct Service is permitted.
(SMT.
ABHILASHA KUMARI, J.)
Umesh/
  Â
Top
