SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Bhikhiben Tarsinh Rajpurohit vs State Of Gujarat on 1 February, 2019

R/CR.MA/1752/2019 ORDER

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION NO. 1752 of 2019

BHIKHIBEN TARSINH RAJPUROHIT
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT

Appearance:
MR HARDIK H DAVE(6295) for the PETITIONER(s) No. 1,2
MR KP RAVAL, APP for the RESPONDENT(s) No. 1

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE VIPUL M. PANCHOLI

Date : 01/02/2019

ORAL ORDER

1. Rule. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor
Mr. K.P.Raval waives service of notice of Rule on
behalf of respondent – State.

2. By way of the present application under
Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure,
1973, the applicants accused have prayed to
release them on anticipatory bail in case of his
arrest in connection with the FIR registered at
C.R. No.I-5 of 2019 with Valsad Town Police
Station for the offences punishable under
Sections 306, 498A and 114 of the Indian Penal
Code.

3. Learned advocate for the applicants submits
that the nature of allegations are such for which
custodial interrogation at this stage is not

Page 1 of 5
R/CR.MA/1752/2019 ORDER

necessary. Besides, the applicants are available
during the course of investigation and will not
flee from justice. In view of the above, the
applicants may be granted anticipatory bail.

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
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 applicants accused to oppose such
application on merits may be kept open.

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. Having heard the learned advocates for the
parties and on perusing the material placed on
record and taking into consideration the facts of
the case, nature of allegations, gravity of
offences, role attributed to the accused, without
discussing the evidence in detail, at this stage,
I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the
applicants. This Court has also considered the

Page 2 of 5
R/CR.MA/1752/2019 ORDER

fact that applicant No.1 is aged about 73 years
and grand mother-in-law of the deceased and
applicant No.2 is residing at Pali, Rajasthan.
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 Ors. as reported at [2011] 1 SCC
694, wherein the Hon’ble Apex Court reiterated
the law laid down by the Constitution Bench in
the case of Shri Gurubaksh Singh Sibbia Ors.,
as reported at (1980) 2 SCC 665.

6. In the result, the present application is
allowed by directing that in the event of
applicants herein being arrested pursuant to FIR
registered at C.R. No.I-5 of 2019 with Valsad
Town Police Station, the applicants shall be
released on bail on furnishing a personal bond of
Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) each with
one surety of like amount on the following
conditions that they:

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

(b) shall remain present at the concerned
Police Station on 08.02.2019 between
11.00 a.m. and 2.00 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

Page 3 of 5
R/CR.MA/1752/2019 ORDER

disclosing such facts to the court or to
any police officer;

(d) shall 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) shall 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) shall 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 it on merits;

7. 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

Page 4 of 5
R/CR.MA/1752/2019 ORDER

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.

8. At the trial, the Trial Court shall not be
influenced by the prima facie observations made
by this Court in this order while enlarging the
applicants on bail.

9. Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid
extent. Direct service is permitted.

(VIPUL M. PANCHOLI, J)
Jani

Page 5 of 5

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

All Law documents and Judgment copies
Laws and Bare Acts of India
Landmark SC/HC Judgements
Rules and Regulations of India.

STUDY REPORTS

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