SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Mehul Kumar Chandrakant Panchal vs State Of Gujarat on 8 March, 2019

R/CR.MA/4104/2019 ORDER

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION NO. 4104 of 2019

MEHUL KUMAR CHANDRAKANT PANCHAL
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT

Appearance:
MR DR BHATT(165) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR KP RAVAL, APP PUBLIC PROSECUTOR(2) for the Respondent(s) No.1

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE J.B.PARDIWALA

Date : 08/03/2019
ORAL ORDER

1. Rule returnable forthwith. Mr. K.P. Raval, the learned APP waives
service of notice of rule for and on behalf of the respondent­State.

2. This is an application at the instance of an accused seeking regular
bail in connection with the F.I.R. bearing I­C.R. No.11 of 2018 lodged
with the Ranip Police Station, Ahmedabad for the offences punishable
under Sections­304B, 306, 498A r/w.114 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. This is a successive bail application. In the past, the applicant had
come before this Court praying for bail, however, the same was disposed
of as not pressed vide order dated 15/06/2018 passed in the Criminal
Misc. Application No.8446 of 2018.

This successive bail application is essentially on the ground that
settlement has been arrived at between the family members of the
deceased and the applicant­accused. An affidavit has been filed by Amit
Babubhai Kawa, the original first informant (brother of the deceased). In

Page 1 of 4
R/CR.MA/4104/2019 ORDER

the affidavit, it has been stated as under:­

“2. I state that my sister was married to applicant no.1 Mehul
Chandrakant Panchal in May, 2015. Out of the said wedlock they
have no children. I state that my sister committed suicide on
25/01/2018 and so I lodged the present F.I.R.]

3. I state that the impugned F.I.R. was lodged by me against the
applicants, but hence now the dispute has been amicably settled
between us and I had no objection if the impugned FIR/ chargesheet
and all consequential proceedings arising out of the impugned FIR is
quashed and set aside in the interest of justice.

4. I state that I had no personal enmity with the applicants. I say
that an unfortunate incident occurred because of that both sides were
under shock. After deliberations and discussions amongst family
members of both sides the dispute between us has been resolved and I
realized the impugned FIR is result of misunderstanding and on my
part.

5. I state that the dispute has been resolved between us and do not
wish to further go against applicant. I state that the FIR was filed
because of anger, desperation, anxiety and misunderstanding and
therefore, I do not want to prosecute them. Hence, I agree and give
consent to quash the impugned F.I.R./charge sheet and all
consequential proceedings against the applicants. I state that dispute
involved is purely personal in nature and does not involve public
policy.

6. I state that I had filed the present affidavit with complete state
of consciousness and stability of sound mind and health and not being
influenced by any one.”

4. I take notice of the fact that the applicant is in custody since
26/01/2018. The applicant was married to the deceased and it was a
second marriage for both i.e. the applicant as well as the deceased.
Chargesheet has already been filed and the case has been committed to
the Court of Sessions. On committal of the case, the same came to be
registered as Sessions Case No.87 of 2018 in the Court of the City Civil
Sessions Judge, Ahmedabad.

Page 2 of 4

R/CR.MA/4104/2019 ORDER

5. Ordinarily, such settlement should not weigh with the Court
having regard to the nature of the offence. However, prima­facie, it
could be said that as settlement has been arrived at, the trial is now
going to be an empty formality. It goes without saying that ultimately,
the guilt or the innocence of the applicant­accused shall be decided by
the trial Court on the basis of the evidence that may be led in the course
of the trial.

6. Having regard to the fact that the applicant­accused is in custody
since 26/01/2018, I am persuaded to exercise my discretion in favour of
the applicant­accused.

7. In the result, the present application is allowed and the applicant­
accused is ordered to be released on regular bail in connection with I­
CR.No.11 of 2018 registered with the Ranip Police Station,
Ahmedabad on executing a personal bond of Rs.15,000/­ (Rupees
Fifteen Thousand only) with a solvent surety of the like amount to the
satisfaction of the trial Court and subject to the conditions that he shall;

[a] not take undue advantage of liberty or misuse liberty;

[b] not act in a manner injurious to the interest of the
prosecution;

[c] surrender passport, if any, to the lower court within a week;

[d] not leave the State of Gujarat without prior permission of
the Sessions Judge concerned;

[e] attend the trial Court on all dates of hearing;

[f] furnish the present address of residence to the Investigating
Officer and also to the Court at the time of execution of the
bond and shall not change the residence without prior
permission of this Court;

Page 3 of 4

R/CR.MA/4104/2019 ORDER

8. The authorities will release the applicant, only if he is not required
in connection with any other offence for the time being. If breach of any
of the above conditions is committed, the Sessions Judge concerned will
be free to issue warrant or take appropriate action in the matter.

9. Bail bond to be executed before the lower Court having
jurisdiction to try the case. It will be open for the concerned Court to
delete, modify and/or relax any of the above conditions, in accordance
with law.

10. At the trial, the trial Court shall not be influenced by the
observations of preliminary nature qua the evidence at this stage made
by this Court while enlarging the applicant on bail.

Mr. Amrish Pandya, the learned counsel has appeared on behalf of
the original first informant. The Registry shall permit Mr. Amrish
Pandya to file his vakalatnama on behalf of the original first informant.

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

(J. B. PARDIWALA, J)
aruna

Page 4 of 4

Leave a Reply

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

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