R/CR.MA/4588/2019 ORDER
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION NO. 4588 of 2019
KHIRABHA KARUBHA MANEK
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT
Appearance:
MR HARSHIL C DATTANI(6241) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR MITESH AMIN, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR(2) for the Respondent(s) No. 1
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE VIPUL M. PANCHOLI
Date : 12/03/2019
ORAL ORDER
1. Rule. Mr.Mitesh Amin, Learned Public Prosecutor,
waives service of notice of Rule on behalf of
respondentState.
2. By way of the present application under Section
438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, the
applicantaccused has prayed for anticipatory
bail in connection with the FIR being C.R.No.I-4
of 2019 registered with Dwarka Police Station,
District Devbhoomi Dwarka, for the offences
punishable under Sections 306, 114 and 498A of
the Indian Penal Code.
3. Learned advocate for the applicant submits that
the nature of allegations are such for which
custodial interrogation at this stage is not
necessary. He further submits that the applicant
will keep himself available during the course of
investigation, trial also and will not flee from
justice.
4. Learned advocate for the applicant on
Page 1 of 5
R/CR.MA/4588/2019 ORDER
instructions states that the applicant is 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 applicant 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 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 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
offence, role attributed to the accused, without
discussing the evidence in detail, at this
stage, this Court is inclined to grant
anticipatory bail to the applicant.
7. This Court has also considered the following
aspects:
(a) the applicant is aged about 65 years;
(b) the applicant is a fatherinlaw of the
deceased;
(c) general allegations are levelled against
the fatherinlaw and motherinlaw of the
Page 2 of 5
R/CR.MA/4588/2019 ORDER
deceased; and
(d) motherinlaw of the deceased is granted
anticipatory bail by this Court.
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. 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. Vs. State of Punjab, as reported at
(1980) 2 SCC 665.
9. In the result, the present application is
allowed. The applicant is ordered to be released
on bail in the event of his arrest in connection
with a FIR being C.R.No.I-4 of 2019 registered
with Dwarka Police Station, District Devbhoomi
Dwarka, on his executing a personal bond of
Rs.10,000/ (Rupees Ten 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 concerned Police
Station on 19.03.2019 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 disclosing such facts
to the court or to any police officer;
Page 3 of 5
R/CR.MA/4588/2019 ORDER
(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 Trial 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;
10. Despite this order, it would be open for the
Investigating Agency to apply to the competent
Magistrate, for police remand of the applicant.
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
Page 4 of 5
R/CR.MA/4588/2019 ORDER
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.
11. At the trial, the 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.
(VIPUL M. PANCHOLI, J)
piyush
Page 5 of 5