SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Chhayaben W/O. Umeshgiri Goswami vs State Of Gujarat on 29 July, 2021

Try out our Premium Member services: Virtual Legal Assistant, Query Alert Service and an ad-free experience. Free for one month and pay only if you like it.

R/CR.MA/13148/2021 ORDER DATED: 29/07/2021




DARSHAN M VARANDANI(7357) for the Applicant(s) No. 1,2,3
MR RONAK RAVAL, APP (2) for the Respondent(s) No. 1


Date : 29/07/2021


1. Rule. Learned APP Mr.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 for anticipatory bail in
connection with the FIR being C.R.No.11205031210838
of 2021 registered with Mandvi Police Station, Kutch
West Bhuj for the offenses punishable under
Sections 306,
498A, 323, 114 of Indian Penal Code and Sections 3 and 4
of Dowry Prohibition Act.

3. Learned advocate for the applicants submits
that the nature of allegations are such for which custodial
interrogation at this stage is not necessary. He further
submits that the applicants will keep themselves available
during the course of investigation, trial also and will not flee
from justice.

Page 1 of 5

Downloaded on : Sat Jul 31 10:47:50 IST 2021

R/CR.MA/13148/2021 ORDER DATED: 29/07/2021

4. 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 his
remand. He further submits 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. Learned advocate, therefore, submitted
that considering the above facts, the applicant may be
granted anticipatory bail.

5. 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

6. Having heard the learned advocates for the
parties and 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

7.This Court has considered following aspects,

(a) applicant no.1 is mother-in-law, applicant-no.2 is father-
in-law and applicant no.3 is uncle-in-law of the deceased;

(b) it is submitted that they have been falsely implicated in
the FIR in question; (c) learned advocate for the applicant
referred to the whatsapp chat which is produced on record

Page 2 of 5

Downloaded on : Sat Jul 31 10:47:50 IST 2021
R/CR.MA/13148/2021 ORDER DATED: 29/07/2021

in support of the contention that the present applicants
have been falsely implicated; learned advocate has also
referred to the other documentary evidence which are
placed on record; (d) I have considered the role attributed
to the applicants;

In the facts and circumstances of the present case, since the
custodial interrogation of the applicants is not required at this
stage, I am inclined to consider the case of the applicants.

8. 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., 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. Vs. State of Punjab,
reported at (1980) 2 SCC 565.

9. In the result, the present application is allowed.
The applicants are ordered to be released on bail in the
event of their arrest in connection with a FIR being
C.R.No.11205031210838 of 2021 registered with
Mandvi Police Station, Kutch West Bhuj on their
executing a personal bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten
Thousand Only) each with one surety of like amount on the
following conditions:

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

(b) shall remain present at concerned Police Station on
5.8.2021 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

Page 3 of 5

Downloaded on : Sat Jul 31 10:47:50 IST 2021
R/CR.MA/13148/2021 ORDER DATED: 29/07/2021

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
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 till further orders;

(f) shall not leave India without the permission of the
concerned trial court and if having passport shall
deposit the same before the concerned 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

10. 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.

Page 4 of 5

Downloaded on : Sat Jul 31 10:47:50 IST 2021

R/CR.MA/13148/2021 ORDER DATED: 29/07/2021

11. At the trial, the concerned trial court shall not be
influenced by the prima facie observations made by this
Court in the present order.

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


Page 5 of 5

Downloaded on : Sat Jul 31 10:47:50 IST 2021

Leave a Reply

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

Copyright © 2023 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