MyNation KnowledgeBase

Landmark Judgments and Articles on Law

Register to Download

Bald allegations in FIR, Bail granted

Gujarat High Court

(11 Jan, 2019)

Anil Bhawan Vaskeliya

vs.

State Of Gujarat

Mr. Abhaykumar P. Shah (3093) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1

Mr. D.M Devnani, App (2) for the Respondent(s) No. 1

A.Y Kogje, J.:— This application is filed by the applicant under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for regular bail in connection with FIR registered as C.R No. I-102 of 2017 with Mundra Police Station, District-Kachchh, for the offence punishable under Sections 395, 397 and 452 of the Indian Penal Code and under Section 135 of the Gujarat Police Act.

2. Learned advocate appearing on behalf of the applicant submits that considering the nature of offence, the applicant may be enlarged on regular bail by imposing suitable conditions.

3. On the other hand, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent-State has opposed grant of regular bail looking to the nature and gravity of the offence.

4. Learned Advocates appearing on behalf of the respective parties do not press for a further reasoned order.

5. I have heard the learned advocates appearing on behalf of the respective parties and perused the papers. Following aspects are considered:—

I) The F.I.R is registered on 06-11-2017 for the offence which is alleged to have taken place on 06-11-2017;

II) The applicant is in custody since 22-05-2018;

III) Investigation is concluded and charge-sheet is filed;

IV) Submission of the learned Advocate for the applicant that there is no recovery or discovery from the applicant regarding Muddamal of the offence;

V) No identification has been carried out;

See also  If interim maintenance by wife has already been secured under Domestic Violence Act, will application u/s.125 CrPC be maintainable?

VI) No evidence connecting the applicant with the offence;

VII) Learned Additional Public Prosecutor under the instructions of the Investigating Officer is unable to bring on record any special circumstances against the applicant.

6. This Court has taken into consideration the law laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Sanjay Chandra v. Central Bureau of Investigation reported in (2012) 1 SCC 40.

7. In the facts and circumstances of the case and considering the nature of the allegations made against the applicant in the First Information Report, without discussing the evidence in detail prima facie, this Court is of the opinion that this is a fit case to exercise the discretion and enlarge the applicant on regular bail.

8. Hence, the present application is allowed. The applicant is ordered to be released on regular bail in connection with C.R No. I-102 of 2017 with Mundra Police Station, District-Kachchh, on executing a personal bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand Only) with one surety of the 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 to leave Taluka-Mundra till the completion of the trial except for marking presence and attending the trial including the trail against the applicant in the State of Madhya Pradesh;

(e) mark presence before the concerned Police Station on alternate Monday of every English calendar month for a period of six months between 11.00 a.m and 2.00 p.m;

See also  SC guidelines to Judges about Judgments writing in Sexual Offences, misogyny and imposing illegal bail conditions

(f) furnish the present address of his 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;

9. The authorities will release the applicant only if he is not required in connection with any other offence for the time being. If breach of any of the above conditions is committed, the Sessions Judge 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. It will be open for the concerned Court to delete, modify and/or relax any of the above conditions, in accordance with law.

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.

12. The application is allowed in the aforesaid terms. Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent. Direct Service is permitted.

Leave a Reply

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


Not found ...? HOW TO WIN 498a, DV, DIVORCE; Search in Above link
MyNation Times Magzine


All Law documents and Judgment copies
Laws and Bare Acts of India
Important SC/HC Judgements on 498A IPC
Rules and Regulations of India.

STUDY REPORTS

CopyRight @ MyNation
×

Free Legal Help, Just WhatsApp Away

MyNation HELP line

We are Not Lawyers, but No Lawyer will give you Advice like We do

Please read Group Rules – CLICK HERE, If You agree then Please Register CLICK HERE and after registration  JOIN WELCOME GROUP HERE

We handle Women Centric biased laws like False Section 498A IPC, Domestic Violence(DV ACT), Divorce, Maintenance, Alimony, Child Custody, HMA 24, 125 CrPc, 307, 312, 313, 323, 354, 376, 377, 406, 420, 497, 506, 509; TEP, RTI and many more…

See also  If interim maintenance by wife has already been secured under Domestic Violence Act, will application u/s.125 CrPC be maintainable?
MyNation FoundationMyNation FoundationMyNation Foundation