Fuleshbhai Amratbhai Rabari vs State Of Gujarat on 15 September, 2017

R/CR.MA/21880/2017 ORDER

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL) NO. 21880 of
2017

FULESHBHAI AMRATBHAI RABARI….Applicant(s)
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT….Respondent(s)

Appearance:
MR YM THAKKAR, ADVOCATE for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MS JIRGA JHAVERI, ADDL. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for the Respondent(s)
No. 1
MS RICHA SHAH, ADVOCATE FOR MR VISHAL MEHTA for the complainant.

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.R.UDHWANI
Date : 15/09/2017

ORAL ORDER

1. Appearance of learned advocate Ms. Richa Shah for
learned advocate Mr. Vishal Mehta for the complainant be
recorded.

2. This is an application by the applicant 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-87 of 2017 before Amraiwadi Police Station for the
offence punishable under Sections 376, 377, 323, 498(A),
506(1) and 114 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. Heard learned advocate for the applicant, learned APP
for the respondent State and learned advocate for the
complainant.

Page 1 of 4

HC-NIC Page 1 of 4 Created On Sat Sep 16 00:54:02 IST 2017
R/CR.MA/21880/2017 ORDER

4. Having considered the rival contentions, it appears that
the alleged incident has occurred on 18.3.2016 and the
complainant prosecutrix has herself stated in the complaint
itself that on the very next day of the incident in question she
was assisted by her brother-in-law and husband in an auto-
rickshaw to her parental house. Therefore explanation in the
FIR that she was frightened because of the execution of the
threat by the petitioner prima facie does not seem to be a
bonafide explanation; inasmuch as, if after 18.3.2016, she was
with her parents, the threat in the opinion of this Court prima
facie would cease to operate and she was free to file the
complaint against the petitioner. Pertinently and concededly,
after 18.3.2016, four different complaints were made by her
without referring the incident dated 18.3.2016. However it
also appears that the prosecutrix for the first time decided to
file the complaint for the incident dated 18.3.2016, on
15.7.2017, and thus, in the above circumstances, the
complaint lacks an explanation of delay between 18.3.2016
and 15.7.2017.

However without deliberating upon the bonafides of the
complainant prosecutrix at this stage of the proceedings, this
Court is inclined to admit the petitioner to anticipatory bail
considering the fact that the incident is as old as 18.3.2016
and the complainant has already come out with her part of the
version which is already recorded in the investigation papers
and now there does not appear to be the necessity of the
petitioner for custodial interrogation. The petitioner is
therefore admitted to bail in anticipation of his arrest.

5. In the result, this application is allowed. It is directed that

Page 2 of 4

HC-NIC Page 2 of 4 Created On Sat Sep 16 00:54:02 IST 2017
R/CR.MA/21880/2017 ORDER

in the event of arrest of the applicant herein in connection
with FIR registered at C.R. No.I-87 of 2017 at Amraiwadi
Police Station, 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 20/09/2017 between 11.00 a.m. and 2.00 p.m.
and mark his presence with the concerned police
station twice a week;

(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 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

(g) it would be open to the Investigating Officer to
file an application for remand if he considers it
proper and just and the learned Magistrate would
decide the same on merits;

6. Despite this order, it would be open for the Investigating
Agency to apply to the competent Magistrate, for Police

Page 3 of 4

HC-NIC Page 3 of 4 Created On Sat Sep 16 00:54:02 IST 2017
R/CR.MA/21880/2017 ORDER

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.

7. 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.

(G.R.UDHWANI, J.)
syed/

Page 4 of 4

HC-NIC Page 4 of 4 Created On Sat Sep 16 00:54:02 IST 2017

Leave a Comment

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