SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Indravatidevi Arvindkumarsingh … vs State Of Gujarat on 17 September, 2018

R/CR.MA/16691/2018 ORDER

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION NO. 16691 of 2018

INDRAVATIDEVI ARVINDKUMARSINGH RAJPUT
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT

Appearance:
MR VIRAT G POPAT(3710) for the PETITIONER(s) No. 1,2
MR HARDIK A DAVE(3764) for the RESPONDENT(s) No. 1
MR KP RAVAL, ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR(2) for the
RESPONDENT(s) No. 1

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.Y. KOGJE

Date : 17/09/2018
ORAL ORDER

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-

229/2018 with Umra Police Station, Surat City for the offences

punishable under Sections 306, 507 and 114 of the Indian Penal

Code.

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 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.

Page 1 of 5

R/CR.MA/16691/2018 ORDER

4. I have heard the learned Advocates appearing for the respective

parties, perused the investigation papers and have also taken into

consideration the facts of the case, nature of allegations and 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 submission of learned Advocate for the applicants that the

applicants are not directly related; the applicant No.1 is the mami

sasu and the applicant No.2 is the distant cousin of the husband of

the deceased;

(II) The submission that the allegations are very general in nature

and no specific role is attributed to the applicants;

(III) The submission of learned Advocate for the complainant that

the applicants had been causing continuous harassment on

previous occasions also for which a First Information Report was

registered for the offence punishable under Section 498A of the

Indian Penal Code and where both the applicants were shown as

the accused;

Page 2 of 5

R/CR.MA/16691/2018 ORDER

(IV) Learned Advocate for the complainant relies upon the

application wherein it was alleged that the applicant No.2 had

issued threats to the deceased and it was also narrated to her that

her husband was going to get married again;

(V) With regard to the above contention/s, the Court finds that both

the incidents are of February 2017 and prior thereto. Moreover,

the application was thereafter, filed;

(VI) The submission of learned Advocate for the applicants that the

co-accused persons and identically situated have been protected by

this Court in a quashing petition and;

(VII) Learned Additional Public Prosecutor under the instructions

of the Investigating Officer is unable to bring on record any special

circumstances against the applicants.

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 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-229/2018 with Umra Police Station,

Surat City, the applicants shall be released on bail on their

Page 3 of 5
R/CR.MA/16691/2018 ORDER

furnishing a personal bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand

Only) EACH with one surety of the 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 25th

SEPTEMBER, 2018 between 11.00 AM and 02.00 PM;

(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/them from disclosing such facts to the court or to any

police officer;

(d) shall not obstruct or hamper the police investigation and shall

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 the same on merits;

Page 4 of 5

R/CR.MA/16691/2018 ORDER

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.

10.The application is allowed accordingly. Rule is made absolute in

the aforesaid terms. Direct service is permitted.

Sd/-

(A.Y. KOGJE, J)
Caroline

Page 5 of 5

Leave a Reply

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

Copyright © 2020 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