SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Ravi Vasantbhai Shukla vs State Of Gujarat on 28 April, 2017

R/CR.MA/8043/2017 ORDER

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL ) NO. 8043 of
2017

RAVI VASANTBHAI SHUKLA….Applicant(s)
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT….Respondent(s)

Appearance:
MR PRATIK Y JASANI, ADVOCATE for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR TUSHAR M GOKANI, ADVOCATE for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR ASHISH M DAGLI, ADVOCATE for the complainant
MR. L.B.DABHI, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.V.ANJARIA

Date : 28/04/2017

ORAL ORDER

Rule returnable forthwith. Learned Additional Public
Prosecutor Mr. L. B. Dabhi waives service of rule
on behalf of the respondent State, whereas learned
advocate Mr. Ashish Dagli waives service of rule on behalf
of the complainant. In the facts and circumstances of the
case, the present application was taken up for final
consideration today.

2. It is in connection with the First Information Report
bearing Crime Register No. I-60 of 2017 registered with
Mahila Police Station, Rajkot, on 09.03.2017 against the
present applicant-accused for the offences under Sections
498A, 306 and 114 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, that

Page 1 of 6

HC-NIC Page 1 of 6 Created On Sat Apr 29 02:04:19 IST 2017
R/CR.MA/8043/2017 ORDER

this application under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal
Procedure, 1973 is presented by the applicant-the accused
No.2.

3. The first informant was the father of the deceased
woman, who stated that his daughter had married before 14
years in the year 2003 with the applicant accused and out
of the wedlock, two children were born. The allegations
were made that the applicant and mother-in-law used to
tell his daughter that she should go back to her parental
house as she was not one of their liking. It was stated
that in-laws were instigating. After such general
allegations, it was further stated that the applicant had
an extra-marital relationship with one Aartiben and
despite persuasion, he maintained the relationship and
that the daughter of the first informant was suffering all
these harassment. On a particular day, stated the first
informant, message was received from her in-laws to take
back his daughter. Thereafter, further message was
received that his daughter had hanged herself.

4. Heard learned senior counsel Mr. N. D. Nanavati with
learned advocate Mr. Pratik Jasani for the applicant and
learned APP for the respondent State. Heard learned
advocate for the complainant as well. Learned APP relied
on certain whatsup messages from the papers of the
investigation made available to him by the officer present
in the court.

5. The court considered the allegations in the FIR,
which are in relation to the offences under sections 498A,
306 and 114 of IPC. The marriage span is admittedly 14
years. Out of the wedlock of the applicant and the

Page 2 of 6

HC-NIC Page 2 of 6 Created On Sat Apr 29 02:04:19 IST 2017
R/CR.MA/8043/2017 ORDER

deceased, there are two children aged 13 years and 8
years. It could be submitted by learned senior counsel
that the allegations levelled in the FIR were pertaining
to the alleged extra-marital relationship of the applicant
with another woman, and that at the best reflected discord
in the matrimonial life. Looking to the totality of the
circumstances and the gravity of the offences coupled with
the aforesaid attendant circumstances, discretion deserves
to be granted in favour of the applicant by granting
anticipatory bail to the applicant.

6. The court also took note of the principles laid down
by the Apex Court in Siddharam Satllingappa Mhetre vs.
State of Maharashtra [AIR 2011 SC 312], and in Jai Prakash
Singh vs. State of Bihar [AIR 2012 SC 1676] and other
decisions in which parameters to be considered by the
court for grant of anticipatory bail have been set out,
and applied those parameters to the facts of the case.
Since the court was inclined to grant anticipatory bail to
the applicant-accused, even as learned APP made
submissions to object the grant of bail, he stated that he
would not invite detailed reasons. Learned advocate for
the applicant also did not press for reasons.
6.1 In the facts and circumstances obtained and for the
reasons recorded above, personal liberty of the applicant-
accused deserves to be accorded primacy over his forced
arrest. The investigational needs could be balanced by
imposing appropriate conditions to be observed by the
applicant-accused including the condition of keeping the
right of the police open to ask for remand of the
applicant-accused, if required.

7. As a result of above facts and aspects, present

Page 3 of 6

HC-NIC Page 3 of 6 Created On Sat Apr 29 02:04:19 IST 2017
R/CR.MA/8043/2017 ORDER

application is allowed and it is directed that in the
event of the applicant’s arrest in connection with the
F.I.R. bearing registration No. I-60 of 2017 registered
with Mahila Police Station, Rajkot, on 09.03.2017, he
shall be released forthwith on condition of his executing
a personal bond of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five
Thousand Only).

7.1 The anticipatory bail granted by this Court shall be
further governed and regulated by the following
conditions,

[i] The applicant shall cooperate with the
investigation. He will make himself available for
interrogation and for all investigative purposes
whenever required;

[ii] The applicant shall not obstruct the process
of investigation in any manner. He shall not
directly or indirectly induce threat or extend
promise to any witness so as to dissuade and
prevent such witness from disclosing such facts
as may be required, to the Court or Police
Officer;

[iii] The applicant shall at the time of
execution of bond, furnish full address of his
residence and stay to the Investigating Officer
as well as to the Court concerned. He shall not
change the residence without prior intimation to
the Court concerned during the pendency of the
prosecution in the criminal case;

[iv] The applicant shall not travel beyond the

Page 4 of 6

HC-NIC Page 4 of 6 Created On Sat Apr 29 02:04:19 IST 2017
R/CR.MA/8043/2017 ORDER

territory of the State of Gujarat without prior
permission of the Court concerned;

[v] The applicant shall surrender passport, if
any he is holding, before the Court concerned
immediately;

[vi] The applicant shall appear before Mahila
Police Station, Rajkot on 02.05.2017 between
11.00 am and 02.00 pm.;

[vii] It shall remain open to the Investigating
Officer to seek and file application for remand
of the applicant, if in his discretion he
considers the asking for remand of the applicant
to be just and proper for the purpose of
investigational needs. If such application for
remand is made by the Investigating Officer, the
learned Magistrate concerned would consider the
same on merits without being influenced by the
anticipatory bail granted.

8. It is clarified that despite this order, the
investigating agency is not precluded from applying before
the competent Magistrate for police remand of the
applicant. It is further provided that the applicant shall
remain present before the Magistrate concerned on the
first day of such application, if made, and on all such
subsequent occasions as may be directed by the learned
Magistrate in such proceedings. This would be sufficient
to treat the accused as in judicial custody for the
purpose of entertaining the application for remand by the
prosecution.

Page 5 of 6

HC-NIC Page 5 of 6 Created On Sat Apr 29 02:04:19 IST 2017
R/CR.MA/8043/2017 ORDER

8.1 This liberty available to the prosecution to seek

remand shall be without prejudice to the rights of the
accused to contend against or to seek stay against the
remand. It is further clarified that the applicant even if
remanded to the police custody, after completion of the
remand period; shall be set at liberty immediately,
subject to other conditions of this anticipatory bail
order, to be complied with.

8.2 It is clarified that the observations made in this
order are for the purpose of granting pre-arrest
protection only. It is further clarified that the trial
court shall not be influenced by any of the observations
made in this order and the same shall be treated for the
purpose of dealing with the present application only.

9. The present application is allowed in the aforesaid
terms. Rule is made absolute.

Direct service is permitted.

(N.V.ANJARIA, J.)
cmjoshi

Page 6 of 6

HC-NIC Page 6 of 6 Created On Sat Apr 29 02:04:19 IST 2017

Leave a Reply

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


Not found ...? HOW TO WIN 498a, DV, DIVORCE; Search in Above link

All Law documents and Judgment copies
Laws and Bare Acts of India
Landmark SC/HC Judgements
Rules and Regulations of India.

STUDY REPORTS

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