Jorabhai Somabhai Ranivadiya … vs State Of Gujarat on 6 October, 2017

R/CR.MA/23618/2017 ORDER


of 2017

STATE OF GUJARAT….Respondent(s)

MR LAXMANSINH M ZALA, ADVOCATE for the Applicant(s) No. 1 – 4
PARIMALSINH J VAGHELA, ADVOCATE for the Applicant(s) No. 1 – 4
SWETA A DAVE, ADVOCATE for the Applicant(s) No. 1 – 4
MS.M.D.MEHTA, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1


Date : 06/10/2017


[1] This application is filed by the applicants under Section
438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for anticipatory bail in
the event of their arrest in connection with FIR registered at
C.R.No.I-55 of 2017 with Dhrangadhra Taluka Police Station
for the offence punishable under Sections 363, 366, 376 and 114
of the Indian Penal Code and under Section 3(a) and 4 of the
Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012.

[2] Learned advocate appearing on behalf of the
applicants would submit that considering the nature of offence, the
applicants may be enlarged on anticipatory bail by imposing
suitable conditions.

[3] On the other hand, the learned Additional Public
Prosecutor appearing for the respondent-State has opposed this
application and granting anticipatory bail to the applicants looking
to the nature and gravity of the offence.

[4] I have heard the learned advocates appearing for the

Page 1 of 4

HC-NIC Page 1 of 4 Created On Sat Oct 07 04:19:34 IST 2017
R/CR.MA/23618/2017 ORDER

respective parties, perused the investigation papers and have also
taken into consideration the facts of the case, nature of
allegations, role attributed to the applicants- accused. Without
discussing the evidence in detail, at this stage, I am inclined to
grant anticipatory bail to the applicants. 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 Others, reported at [2011] 1 SCC 6941,
wherein the Hon’ble Apex Court has reiterated the law laid down
by the Constitutional Bench in the case of Shri Gurubaksh Singh
Sibbia and others, reported at (1980) 2 SCC 665.

[5] Following aspects are also considered:-

(I) The applicants are the family members of the
accused No.1 – Ranjit with whom prosecutrix had

(II) Ranjit is aged 20 years and prosecutrix is aged
16 years and 4 months ;

(III) The statement of the prosecutrix reflects that it
was the prosecutrix who instigated the accused No.1 to
elope with her, and in the statement, no role is
attributed to the applicants to connect them with the

[6] Learned advocate for the applicants on instructions
states that the applicants are ready and willing to abide by all the
conditions, including imposition of conditions with regard to the
powers of Investigating Agency to file an application before the
competent court for their remand. He would further submit that
upon filing of such application by the Investigating Agency, the
right of the applicants-accused to oppose such application on

Page 2 of 4

HC-NIC Page 2 of 4 Created On Sat Oct 07 04:19:34 IST 2017
R/CR.MA/23618/2017 ORDER

merits may be kept open.

[7] In the result, the present application is allowed by
directing that in the event of arrest of the applicants herein in
connection with FIR registered as C.R.No.I-55 of 2017 with
Dhrangadhra Taluka Police Station, the applicants shall be
released on bail on their furnishing a personal bond of
Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten thousands only) each with one surety of
the like amount on the following conditions that they shall:

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

(b) remain present at the concerned Police Station on
11.10.2017 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 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 their 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

Page 3 of 4

HC-NIC Page 3 of 4 Created On Sat Oct 07 04:19:34 IST 2017
R/CR.MA/23618/2017 ORDER

application for remand if he/she/they considers it proper
and just and the learned Magistrate would decide the same
on merits;

[8] Despite this order, it would be open for the
Investigating Agency to apply to the competent Magistrate, for
Police remand of the applicants. The applicants 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 applicants, 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.

[9] At the trial, the Trial Court shall not be influenced by
the prima facie observations made by this Court while enlarging
the applicants on bail. The application is allowed accordingly. Rule
is made absolute in the aforesaid terms. Direct service is

(A.Y. KOGJE, J.)


Page 4 of 4

HC-NIC Page 4 of 4 Created On Sat Oct 07 04:19:34 IST 2017

Leave a Comment

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