R/CR.MA/18591/2017 ORDER
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL) NO. 18591 of
2017
GAURANG NATVARBHAI PRAJAPATI….Applicant(s)
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT….Respondent(s)
Appearance:
MR KARTIK V PANDYA, ADVOCATE for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR. BAKUL S PANCHAL, ADVOCATE for the Respondent(s) No. 1
MR LR POOJARI ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for the Respondent(s)
No. 1
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.R.UDHWANI
Date : 15/09/2017
ORAL ORDER
1. Heard learned Advocate for the applicant, learned advocate for
the original complainant and learned APP for the respondentState.
2. This application is filed seeking bail under Section 438 of the
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 in respect of the offences punishable
under Sections 496, 420, 376 and 313 of the Indian Penal Code for
which FIR came to be registered at C.R. No. I 189 of 2017 with Naroda
Police Station.
3. Anticipatory bail is sought by the petitioner on the ground that the
Page 1 of 5
HC-NIC Page 1 of 5 Created On Sun Sep 17 01:53:04 IST 2017
R/CR.MA/18591/2017 ORDER
allegations made against the petitioner in the FIR are false and
baseless. For that purpose, reliance has been placed upon certain
audio recordings representing the conversation between the petitioner
and the prosecutrix ranging between the track 1 and track 17. During
the pendency of this petition, following developments as recorded in the
order dated 09.08.2017 and 29.8.2017 took place.
4. In conformity with the said development, a report by Directorate
of Forensic Science dated 13.09.2017 has been submitted confirming
that conversation in the above 17 tracks between the two persons is not
tampered with and the conversation matche with the voice sample of
the petitioner and the prosecutrix. Learned counsel for the petitioner has
relied upon the said tracks more particularly track nos. 15, 16 and 17
and would contend that the allegations made in the FIR that prosecutrix
was cheated by withholding the information from her about the marital
status of the petitioner having four children is false.
5. Learned Advocate for the applicant on instructions states that the
applicant is ready and willing to abide by all the conditions, including
impositions of conditions with regard to the 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 applicant accused to oppose such
application on merits may be kept open.
Page 2 of 5
HC-NIC Page 2 of 5 Created On Sun Sep 17 01:53:04 IST 2017
R/CR.MA/18591/2017 ORDER
6. Learned APP and the learned counsel for the complainant would
contend that the offence of serious nature has been committed by the
petitioner and that after concealing the marital status with four children
out of the existing marriage a false promise to marry the prosecutrix
was given by the petitioner and on that basis, her consent was obtained
for physical relations. It was submitted that therefore, custodial
interrogation of the petitioner is necessary and he should be denied
anticipatory bail.
7. This Court would have appreciated the above referred facts; but
for the parties not inclined to invite the reasoned order for admitting the
petitioner to bail in anticipation of his arrest. Suffice it to say that the
case for anticipatory bail is made out considering the investigation
papers and the documents annexed with petition including above
referred facts.
9. In the result, this application is allowed. It is directed that in the
event of arrest of the applicant herein in connection with FIR registered
at C.R. No.I 189 of 2017 with Naroda Police Station, the applicant shall
be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond of Rs.10,000/
(Rupees ten thousands only) with one surety each of the like amount on
the following conditions that he shall:
(a) cooperate with the investigation and make themselves
Page 3 of 5
HC-NIC Page 3 of 5 Created On Sun Sep 17 01:53:04 IST 2017
R/CR.MA/18591/2017 ORDER
available for interrogation whenever required;
(b) remain present at the concerned Police Station on
19.09.2017 between 11.00 a.m. and 2.00 p.m.;
(c) 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/them from disclosing such facts to
the court or to any police officer;
(d) 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) 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) 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 the same 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
Page 4 of 5
HC-NIC Page 4 of 5 Created On Sun Sep 17 01:53:04 IST 2017
R/CR.MA/18591/2017 ORDER
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 Trial Court shall not be influenced by the prima
facie observations made by this Court while enlarging the applicant on
bail. Rule is made is made absolute. Direct service is permitted.
(G.R.UDHWANI, J.)
niru*
Page 5 of 5
HC-NIC Page 5 of 5 Created On Sun Sep 17 01:53:04 IST 2017