Raju Sujataram @ Sujanaram … vs State Of Gujarat on 4 July, 2017

R/CR.MA/16675/2017 ORDER

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR REGULAR BAIL) NO. 16675 of 2017

RAJU SUJATARAM @ SUJANARAM DEVASHI….Applicant(s)
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT….Respondent(s)

Appearance:
MR ZUBIN F BHARDA, ADVOCATE for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MS HANSA PUNANI, ADDL. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for the Respondent(s)
No. 1

CORAM: HONOURABLE MS JUSTICE SONIA GOKANI

Date : 04/07/2017

ORAL ORDER

1. Rule, returnable forthwith. Ms.Hansa Punani,

learned Additional Public Prosecutor waives

service of notice of rule for and on behalf of

respondent-State.

2. Present application is filed under section 439 of

the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, for regular

bail in connection with CR.No.I-113 of 2017

registered with Limbayat police station, Surat

for the offences punishable under sections 363,

Page 1 of 6

HC-NIC Page 1 of 6 Created On Wed Jul 05 01:42:47 IST 2017
R/CR.MA/16675/2017 ORDER

366 and 376 of the Indian Penal Code and sections

3 and 4 of the Protection of Children from Sexual

Offences Act, 2012.

3. Brief facts of the case are as under:-

3.1 Complainant   Anitasing   wife   of   Akhileshsing 

Vijaykumarsing   Rajput   had   alleged   of   her 

daughter,   who   is   17   years   and   6   months   old   to 

have   been   abducted   by   the   present   applicant   on 

8.5.2017   when   she   had   left   home   by   saying   that 

she   was   going   to   beauty   parlor.     Since   the 

daughter   was   not   traced,   on   realizing   that   the 

present   applicant   is   the   owner   of   Sari   Shop   at 

Bombay Market from where, the complainant used to 

purchase Sari and that she was knowing applicant 

very well, the complainant went to the house of 

the applicant to inquire, but the applicant was 

not found and, therefore, the complaint. 

4. This Court has heard learned advocate Mr. Bharda 

for the applicant, who has urged this Court that 

Page 2 of 6

HC-NIC Page 2 of 6 Created On Wed Jul 05 01:42:47 IST 2017
R/CR.MA/16675/2017 ORDER

as per Aadhar Card, on the date of incident, date 

of   birth   of   the   prosecutrix   indicates   1.1.1998 

and, therefore, the age of the prosecutrix on the 

date of incident is more than 18 years. From some 

of   the   photographs   that   he   had   chosen   not   to 

place on record, it is urged that they both had 

liked   each   other   and   this   is   a   case   of 

prosecutrix voluntarily joining the applicant. 

5. This   Court   has   heard   learned   Additional   Public 

Prosecutor   Ms.   Hansa   Punani   for   the   respondent­

State. 

6. Having considered the material on record and also 

affidavit of mother before the trial Court where 

she   had   also   expressed   her   wish   that   a 

compromise,   due   to   intervention   of   some   of   the 

relatives has been arrived at, and as she has no 

objection to the bail having granted, this prima 

facie appears to be a case where the prosecutrix 

has joined the applicant. In any case, she being, 

as   per   Aadhar   Card,   more   than   18   years   of   age, 

the   averments   and   allegations   set   out   in  the 

Page 3 of 6

HC-NIC Page 3 of 6 Created On Wed Jul 05 01:42:47 IST 2017
R/CR.MA/16675/2017 ORDER

complaint of abduction under sections 363 and 366 

of   the   Indian   Penal   Code,   at   this   stage,   would 

enable this Court to allow this application for 

regular bail. 

7. In the facts and circumstances of the case, the 

application   is   allowed   and   applicant   is   ordered 

to   be   released   on   bail   in   connection   with   CR 

No.I­113 of 2017 registered with Limbayat police 

station,   Surat     on   executing   a   bond   of 

Rs.10,000/­   (Rupees   Ten   Thousand   only)   with   one 

surety of like amount to the satisfaction of the 

trial Court and subject to the conditions that he 

shall;

(a) not take undue advantage of liberty or misuse 
liberty;

(b) not act in a manner injurious to the interest 
of the prosecution;

(c) surrender   passport,   if   any,   to   the   lower 
court within a week;

(d) not leave India without prior permission of 
the Sessions Judge concerned;

Page 4 of 6

HC-NIC Page 4 of 6 Created On Wed Jul 05 01:42:47 IST 2017
R/CR.MA/16675/2017 ORDER

(e) regularly attend Court proceedings;

(f) furnish the present address of  residence to 
the  Investigating Officer  and also  to  the Court 
at   the   time   of   execution   of   the   bond   and   shall 
not change the residence without prior permission 
of this Court;

8. The   Authorities   will   release   the   applicant   only 

if   not   required   in   connection   with   any   other 

offence for the time being.

9. If   breach   of   any   of   the   above   conditions   is 

committed, the trial Court concerned will be free 

to   issue   warrant   or   take   appropriate   action   in 

the matter.

10. Bail   bond   to   be   executed   before   the   lower 

court having jurisdiction to try the case.

11. At  the trial,  the  trial  court  shall  not be 

influenced   by   the   observations   of   preliminary 

nature, qua the evidence at this stage, made by 

this Court while enlarging the applicant on bail.

Page 5 of 6

HC-NIC Page 5 of 6 Created On Wed Jul 05 01:42:47 IST 2017
R/CR.MA/16675/2017 ORDER

12. Rule   is   made   absolute   to   the   aforesaid 

extent.  D.S. Permitted.

(MS SONIA GOKANI, J.)
SUDHIR

Page 6 of 6

HC-NIC Page 6 of 6 Created On Wed Jul 05 01:42:47 IST 2017

Leave a Comment

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