SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Pareshbhai Manubhai Prajapati vs State Of Gujarat on 30 January, 2020

R/CR.MA/2081/2020 ORDER



MR VASANTS SHAH(810) for the Applicant(s) No. 1,2
MR MITESH AMIN, SENIOR COUNSEL AND PP(2) for the Respondent(s)
No. 1

Date : 30/01/2020


1. Rule. Learned PP, Mr.Amin 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. I-59 of 2019
registered with Khambhat City Police Station,
Anand for the offenses punishable under
Sections 498A, 114 and 306 of the Indian
Penal Code.

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.

4. Learned advocate for the applicants on

Page 1 of 5

Downloaded on : Fri Jan 31 03:38:24 IST 2020
R/CR.MA/2081/2020 ORDER

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 applicants 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 offences, role attributed to the
accused, without discussing the evidence in
detail, at this stage, I am inclined to grant
anticipatory bail to the applicants.

7. This Court has considered following aspects;

(a) it is submitted by learned advocate for
the applicants that marriage span of the
applicant no.1 with the deceased was more

Page 2 of 5

Downloaded on : Fri Jan 31 03:38:24 IST 2020
R/CR.MA/2081/2020 ORDER

than 17 years; (b) the applicant no.2 is
brother-in-law of the deceased; (c) it is
also submitted that for the alleged incident
which had taken place on 16.12.2019, FIR is
lodged on 20.12.2019; thus, there is a delay
of four days in lodging the FIR; (d) I have
considered the role attributed to the
applicants; two other co-accused have been
enlarged on anticipatory bail; looking to the
over all facts and circumstances of the
present case, 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 his arrest
in connection with a FIR being C.R. No. I –
59 of 2019 registered with Khambhat City
Police Station, Anand on their executing a
personal bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten
Thousand Only) each with one surety of like

Page 3 of 5

Downloaded on : Fri Jan 31 03:38:24 IST 2020
R/CR.MA/2081/2020 ORDER

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 concerned Police
Station on 6.2.2020 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

(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 merits;

10. Despite this order, it would be open for the

Page 4 of 5

Downloaded on : Fri Jan 31 03:38:24 IST 2020
R/CR.MA/2081/2020 ORDER

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 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 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 : Fri Jan 31 03:38:24 IST 2020

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

Copyright © 2022 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