SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Ashokkumar Arjanbhai Patel vs State Of Gujarat on 12 October, 2018

R/CR.MA/19471/2018 ORDER




MR KAASH K THAKKAR(7332) for the PETITIONER(s) No. 1

Date : 12/10/2018

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

2. By way of the present application under Section 438 of the
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, the applicant-original accused
has prayed to release him on anticipatory bail in case of his arrest
in connection with the FIR being C. R. No. I-63 of 2018 registered
with Deodar Police Station, Banaskantha for the offence punishable
under Sections 498A, 323, 506(2), 114 of the Indian Penal Code
and Sections 3 7 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.

3. Learned advocate for the applicant submits that the nature of
allegations are such for which custodial interrogation at this stage
is not necessary. Besides, the applicant is available during the
course of investigation and will not flee from justice. In view of the
above, the applicant may be granted anticipatory bail.

4. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of
the respondent-State has opposed grant of anticipatory bail looking
to the nature and gravity of the offence.

5. I have considered the allegations leveled against the present
applicant in the FIR and considered the role played by the

Page 1 of 3
R/CR.MA/19471/2018 ORDER


6. Having heard the learned advocates for the parties and
perusing the record of the case and taking into consideration the
facts of the case, nature of allegations, role attributed to the
accused and punishment prescribed for the alleged offence,
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 v.
State of Maharashtra and Ors. reported in (2011)1 SCC 694,
wherein the Hon’ble Apex Court reiterated the law laid down by
the Constitutional Bench in the case of Shri Gurubaksh Singh
Sibbia Ors., reported in (1980)2 SCC 565.

7. Learned advocates for the parties do not press for further
reasoned order.

8. In the result, the present application is allowed by directing
that in the event of applicant herein being arrested pursuant to FIR
being C. R. No. I-63 of 2018 registered with Deodar Police Station,
Banaskantha, the applicant shall be released on bail on furnishing a
personal bond of Rs.15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Thousand Only) with
one surety of like amount, on the following conditions:

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

(b) shall remain present at the concerned Police Station on
22/10/2018, 23/10/2018 24/10/2018 between 11:00
a.m. and 7:00 p.m.;

(c) shall 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) shall not obstruct or hamper the police investigation

Page 2 of 3
R/CR.MA/19471/2018 ORDER

and not to play mischief with the evidence collected or
yet to be collected by the Police;

(e) shall 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 or till further orders;

(f) shall not leave India without the permission of the
Court and, if having passports shall surrender the same
before the Trial Court within a week.

9. Despite this order, it would be open for the Investigating
Agency to file an application for police remand of the applicant to
the competent Magistrate, if he thinks it just and proper and
learned Magistrate would decide it on merits. 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 absolute. The present application is
disposed of accordingly.

Direct service is permitted.


Page 3 of 3

Leave a Reply

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

Copyright © 2021 SC and HC Judgments Online at 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 Sectioin 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…

MyNation FoundationMyNation FoundationMyNation Foundation