SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Varshaben W vs State Of Gujarat on 12 April, 2017



STATE OF GUJARAT….Respondent(s)

ABHIMANYU RATHOD, ADVOCATE for the Applicant(s) No. 1 – 2
MR MEHUL H RATHOD, ADVOCATE for the Applicant(s) No. 1 – 2
MR. RONAK RAVAL, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1


Date : 12/04/2017


Rule returnable forthwith. Learned Additional Public
Prosecutor Mr. Ronak Raval waives service of rule on
behalf of the respondent State. In the facts and
circumstances of the case, the present application was
taken up for final consideration today itself.

2. It is in connection with the First Information Report
bearing Crime Register No. I-35 of 2017 registered with
Palanpur West Police Station, Banaskantha on 18.03.2017,
against the present applicants-accused for the offence
under Sections 498A, 306 and 144 of the Indian Penal Code,
1860, that this application under Section 438 of the Code
of Criminal Procedure, 1973 is presented by the

<span “> Page 1 of 6

HC-NIC Page 1 of 6 Created On Thu Apr 13 02:20:49 IST 2017
R/CR.MA/8668/2017 ORDER


3. The first informant stated that her sister-the victim
had been staying at Palanpur and had marriage span of 12
to 13 years, and had two daughters born out of the
wedlock. The allegations in the FIR are that the in-laws
used to harass the sister of the complainant stating that
only daughters were born and no son was born. The
allegations traveled were that on a particular day, that
is on 14.03.2017, since a family member had died, the
applicants accused had come to the occasion and they
harassed the victim and passed remarks in taunt. Two days
thereafter, the complainant learnt from the husband that
the victim had consumed poisonous pills.

4. Heard learned advocate Mr. Abhimanyu Rathod for the
applicants and learned APP for the respondent State.

5. Even as the seriousness of the incident as a whole is
not to be discounted, while comprehending the precise role
of the present applicants, there are aspect which would
earn the applicants the anticipatory bail. Firstly, the
marriage span is 12 years. Secondly, the applicants who
happens to be the sister-in-laws stay separate. The
complainant stay at Planpur at one particular address,
whereas the applicant No.1 though stay in Palanpur, is
untrovertendly said to be staying at different place. The
applicant No.2 is at Ahmedabad. Upon attentively reading
of the allegations in the FIR in its entirety and the role
discernible for attributable to the applicants, is that
that on a particular day, on the occasion of death in the
family, the applicants met the complainant and the
applicants met, where the applicants taunted the deceased

<span “> Page 2 of 6

HC-NIC Page 2 of 6 Created On Thu Apr 13 02:20:49 IST 2017
R/CR.MA/8668/2017 ORDER

victim. This solitary incident and allegations could not
be taken to deny the anticipatory bail plea.

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 applicants-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 applicants also did not press for reasons.

6.1 In the facts and circumstances obtained and for the
reasons recorded above, personal liberty of the
applicants-accused deserves to be accorded primacy over
their forced arrest. The investigational needs could be
balanced by imposing appropriate conditions to be observed
by the applicants-accused including the condition of
keeping the right of the police open to ask for remand of
the applicants-accused, if required.

7. As a result of above facts and aspects, present
application is allowed and it is directed that in the
event of the applicants’ arrest in connection with the
F.I.R. bearing registration No. I-35 of 2017 registered
with Palanpur West Police Station, Banaskantha on
18.03.2017, they shall be released forthwith on condition
of their executing personal bond of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees
Twenty Five Thousand Only) each.

<span “> Page 3 of 6

HC-NIC Page 3 of 6 Created On Thu Apr 13 02:20:49 IST 2017
R/CR.MA/8668/2017 ORDER

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

[i] The applicants shall cooperate with the
investigation. They will make themselves
available for interrogation and for all
investigative purposes whenever required;

[ii] The applicants shall not obstruct the
process of investigation in any manner. They
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

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

[iv] The applicants shall not travel beyond the
territory of the State of Gujarat without prior
permission of the Court concerned;

[v] The applicants shall surrender passport, if
any they are holding, before the Court concerned

[vi] The applicants shall appear before Palanpur

<span “> Page 4 of 6

HC-NIC Page 4 of 6 Created On Thu Apr 13 02:20:49 IST 2017
R/CR.MA/8668/2017 ORDER

West Police Station, Banaskantha on 19.04.2017
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 applicants, 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 concern 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
applicants. It is further provided that the applicants
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.

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 applicants 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.

<span “> Page 5 of 6

HC-NIC Page 5 of 6 Created On Thu Apr 13 02:20:49 IST 2017
R/CR.MA/8668/2017 ORDER

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.


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.


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