IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL)
NO.4655 of 2018
JAYESHBHAI JESINGBHAI BARIA 2….Applicants
STATE OF GUJARAT….Respondent
MR MEHUL M MEHTA, ADVOCATE for the Applicants.
MS KRINA CALLA, APP for the Respondent.
CORAM : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.J.DESAI
Date : 22/02/2018
1. Mr. Mehul M. Mehta, learned advocate appearing for the
applicants seeks permission to withdraw the present
application qua applicant No.1 – Jayeshbhai Jesingbhai Baria.
Permission as prayed for is granted. The present application
stands dismissed qua applicant No.1.
2. Rule. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor waives service of
rule on behalf of respondent – State.
3. By way of the present application under Section 438 of the
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, the applicant Nos.2 3
accused have prayed to release them on anticipatory bail in
case of their arrest in connection with the FIR registered at
C.R. No.I – 17 of 2017 with Ditvas Police Station, Dist.
Mahisagar for the offences punishable under Sections 306,
498A and 114 of the Indian Penal Code.
4. Learned advocate for the applicant Nos.2 and 3 submits that
the nature of allegations are such for which custodial
interrogation at this stage is not necessary. Besides, the
Page 1 of 4
applicant Nos.2 and 3 are available during the course of
investigation and will not flee from justice. In view of the
above, the applicant Nos.2 and 3 may be granted anticipatory
Learned advocate for the applicant Nos.2 and 3, 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 would further submit that upon filing of such
application by the Investigating Agency, the right of
applicants Nos.2 and 3 accused to oppose such application on
merits may be kept open.
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 offence.
6. Having heard the learned advocate for the parties and
perusing the investigating papers and as well as considering
the case and taking into consideration the facts of the case,
nature of allegations, gravity of offences, role attributed to
the accused and considering the allegations levelled against
applicant Nos.2 and 3 which are general in nature and
considering the fact that applicant Nos.2 and 3 being father-
in-law and mother-in-law of the deceased, without discussing
the evidence in detail, at this stage, I am inclined to grant
anticipatory bail to the applicant Nos.2 and 3. 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
 1 SCC 6941, wherein the Hon’ble Apex Court
Page 2 of 4
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.
7. In the result, the present application is allowed qua applicant
Nos.2 and 3 by directing that in the event of applicant Nos.2
and 3 herein being arrested pursuant to FIR registered at
C.R. No.I – 17 of 2017 with Ditvas Police Station, Dist.
Mahisagar, 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
(a) shall cooperate with the investigation and make
themselves available for interrogation whenever
(b) shall remain present at concerned Police Station
on 28.2.2018 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 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
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;
8. Despite this order, it would be open for the Investigating
Page 3 of 4
Agency to apply to the competent Magistrate, for police
remand of the applicant Nos.2 and 3. The applicant Nos.2
and 3 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 Nos.2 and 3, 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 applicant Nos.2 and 3 on bail.
10. Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent. Application is
disposed of accordingly. Direct service is permitted.
Page 4 of 4