Thakor Sangitaben Sendhaji vs State Of Gujarat on 5 June, 2017

R/CR.MA/10856/2017 ORDER

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION NO. 10856 of 2017

THAKOR SANGITABEN SENDHAJI….Applicant(s)
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT….Respondent(s)

Appearance:
MITTAL N PATEL, ADVOCATE for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MS CM SHAH APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.Y. KOGJE

Date : 05/06/2017

ORAL ORDER

1. Rule. Learned APP waives service of Rule on behalf of the
respondent – State.

2. This is an application under Section 438 of the Code of
Criminal Procedure, 1973 for anticipatory bail in the event of
his arrest in connection with FIR registered at C.R. No.I-11 of
2017 before Vasai Police Station, District Mahesana for the
offence punishable under
Sections 363, 366, 376, 343, 506(2)
114 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 4 and 8 of
Protection of Children From Sexual Offences Act.

3. The learned advocate appearing on behalf of the
applicant would submit that considering the nature of offence,
the applicant may be enlarged on anticipatory bail by imposing
suitable conditions.

Page 1 of 4

HC-NIC Page 1 of 4 Created On Tue Jun 06 02:04:57 IST 2017
R/CR.MA/10856/2017 ORDER

4. On the other hand, the learned APP appearing for the
respondent – State has opposed this application and granting
anticipatory bail to the applicant looking to the nature and
gravity of the offence.

5. I have heard the learned Advocates appearing for the
respective parties and perused the investigation papers and
have also taken into consideration the facts of the case, nature
of allegations, role attributed to the applicant – accused and
without discussing the evidence in detail, at this stage, I am
inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the applicant. This Court
has also taken into consideration the law laid down by the
Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of
Siddharam Satlingappa
Mhetre vs. State of Maharashtra and Ors. as reported at
[2011] 1 SCC 6941, wherein the Hon’ble Apex Court reiterated
the law laid down by the Constitutional Bench in the case of
Shri Gurubaksh Singh Sibbia Ors., as reported at (1980) 2
SCC 665.

READ  Ajit Kumar & Ors vs The State Of Bihar & Anr on 10 May, 2017

6. Following aspects are also considered:-

I. The applicant is a lady accused.

II. Considering the role reflected in the FIR to the

extent of fact that the main accused, who
appears to be relative, had stayed with the
prosecutrix on one occasion at her residence.

7. Learned Advocate for the applicant on instructions states
that the applicant is ready and willing to abide by all the
conditions, including impositions of conditions with regard to
the powers of Investigating Agency to file an application before
the competent court for his remand. He would further submit

Page 2 of 4

HC-NIC Page 2 of 4 Created On Tue Jun 06 02:04:57 IST 2017
R/CR.MA/10856/2017 ORDER

that upon filing of such application by the Investigating
Agency, the right of applicant accused to oppose such
application on merits may be kept open.

8. In the result, the present application is allowed by
directing that in the event of arrest of the applicant herein in
connection with FIR registered at C.R. No.I-11 of 2017 before
Vasai Police Station, District Mahesana, the applicant shall be
released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond of
Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten thousands only) with one surety of the
like amount on the following conditions that he shall:

(a) cooperate with the investigation and make
himself available for interrogation whenever
required;

(b) remain present at the concerned Police Station
on 08.06.2017 between 11.00 a.m. and 2.00 p.m.;

(c) not directly or indirectly make any inducement,
threat or promise to any person acquainted with the
fact of the case so as to dissuade him/them from
disclosing such facts to the court or to any police
officer;

(d) not obstruct or hamper the police investigation
and not to play mischief with the evidence collected
or yet to be collected by the police;

(e) at the time of execution of bond, furnish the
address to the investigating officer and the court
concerned and shall not change his residence till
the final disposal of the case till further orders;

(f) not leave India without the permission of the
Court and if having passport, shall deposit the same
before the Trial Court within a week; and

READ  Rubi Devi & Anr vs State Of Bihar on 18 January, 2011

(g) it would be open to the Investigating Officer to
file an application for remand if he considers it

Page 3 of 4

HC-NIC Page 3 of 4 Created On Tue Jun 06 02:04:57 IST 2017
R/CR.MA/10856/2017 ORDER

proper and just and the learned Magistrate would
decide the same on merits;

9. Despite this order, it would be open for the Investigating
Agency to apply to the competent Magistrate, for Police
remand of the applicant. The applicant shall remain present
before the learned Magistrate on the first date of hearing of
such application and on all subsequent occasions, as may be
directed by the learned Magistrate. This would be sufficient to
treat the accused in the judicial custody for the purpose of
entertaining application of the prosecution for police remand.
This is, however, without prejudice to the right of the accused
to seek stay against an order of remand, if, ultimately,
granted, and the power of the learned Magistrate to consider
such a request in accordance with law. It is clarified that the
applicant, even if, remanded to the Police custody, upon
completion of such period of Police remand, shall be set free
immediately, subject to other conditions of this anticipatory
bail order.

10. At the trial, the Trial Court shall not be influenced by the
prima-facie observations made by this Court while enlarging
the applicant on bail. Rule is made is made absolute.

Direct service is permitted.

(A.Y. KOGJE, J.)
YNVYAS

Page 4 of 4

HC-NIC Page 4 of 4 Created On Tue Jun 06 02:04:57 IST 2017

READ  Shahjahan @ Shahjan Sheikh @ Tunu vs State (Nct Of Delhi) on 20 July, 2017

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *