Tuesday, July 30, 2013

ANTIC bail granted even when wmn dead. 498a &306! Charity comisioner runs for anticp bail. Guj HC Grants A. Bail referring Satlingappa Mhetre

ANTI bail granted even when woman dead. 498a &306! Charity commissioner runs for anticp bail. Guj HC Grants A. Bail referring Satlingappa Mhetre


Important learnings
**************************************
* ANTICIPATORY bail granted even in case where the woman is dead 
* the appelent is a charity commissioner
* defence argument is that except the bare version of the complaainnant no other allegations are levelled AGAINST ANY of the persons 
* AB granted with conditions including appearing before police and NOT leaving India and SURRENDERING PASSPORT !!


******************************************************************
This judgment and other similar judgments posted on this blog was / were collected from Judis nic in website and / or other websites of Govt. of India or other internet web sites like worldlii or indiankanoon. Some notes are made by Vinayak. This is a free service provided by Vinayak (pen name). Vinayak is a member of SIF - Save Indian Family Foundation. SIF is committed to fighting FALSE dowry cases and elder abuse. SIF supports gender equality and a fair treatment of law abiding Indian men. Should you find the dictum in this judgment or the judgment itself repealed or amended or would like to make improvements or comments, please post a comment on the comment section of the blog or write to e _ vinayak @ yahoo . com (please remove spaces). Vinayak is NOT a lawyer and nothing in this blog and/or site and/or file should be considered as legal advise.

******************************************************************
******************************************************************



IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION No. 7072 of 2012

=========================================

RATILAL PURSHOTTAMBHAI WAGHELA & 1 Applicant(s)
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT Respondent(s)

=========================================

Appearance :
MR UM SHASTRI for Applicant(s) : 1 2.
MR KP RAVAL ADDL. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for Respondent(s) : 1,

=========================================

CORAM : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ANANT S. DAVE

Date : 31/05/2012

ORAL ORDER

1. This application is filed under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in connection with first information report registered at CR No.I75 of 2012 with Godhra Town Police Station, District: Panchmahal, for the offences punishable under Sections 498(A), 306, 114 etc. of the Indian Penal Code.

2. Learned counsel for the applicants submit that except the bare version of the complainant in the complaint, no other allegations are levelled by any of the persons against the applicant No.1 who is serving in the office of Charity Commissioner. Even the statement of the brother of the victim reveal that she was verbally abused and taunted for not performing household duties. Beyond that, no allegations surfaced during the course of matrimonial life of demanding any dowry etc. or physical abuse. Even prior to the incident as alleged, no proximity to the cause attracting alleged offences are prima facie seen. That, the applicants will be available for the investigation and likelihood of escaping from the investigation or nonavailability of the applicant Nos. 1 and 2 at the time of trial is practically ruled out since applicant No.1 is in Government service and applicant NO.2 is a female permanently stationed and having root in the society. It is further submitted that in view of the above, the applicants may be granted anticipatory bail.

3. Heard Learned APP for the respondent – State.

4. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and perusing the record of the case and taking into consideration the facts of the case, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the applicants. This Court has also taken into consideration the law laid down by the Apex Court in the case of Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre v. State of Maharashtra & Ors. Reported in [2011]1 SCC 694, wherein the Apex Court reiterated the law laid down by the Constitutional Bench in the case of Shri Gurubaksh Singh Sibbia & Ors. Reported in [1980]2 SCC 565.

5. Learned counsel for the parties do not press for further reasoned order.

6. In the result, this application is allowed by directing that in the event of the applicants herein being arrested pursuant to FIR being CR No.I75 of 2012 with Godhra Town Police Station, District: Panchmahal, the applicants shall be released on bail on furnishing a bond of Rs.10,000/( Rupees Ten Thousand only) each with one surety of like amount on following conditions :

[a] shall cooperate with the investigation and make themselves available for interrogation whenever required.

[b] shall remain present at concerned Police Station on 7.6.2012 between 11:00 am to 2:00 pm:

[c] shall not hamper the investigation in any manner nor shall directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any witness so as to dissuade them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any Police Officer;

[d] shall at the time of execution of bond, furnish the address to the Investigating Officer and the Court concerned and shall not change the residence till the final disposal of the case or till further orders;

[e] will not leave India without the permission of the Court and, if is holding a Passport, shall surrender the same before the trial Court immediately

[f] It would be open to the Investigating Officer to file an application for remand, if he considers it just and proper and the concerned Magistrate would decide it on merits.

[g] despite this order, it would be open for the Investigating Agency to apply to the competent Magistrate, for police remand of the applicant. 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 applicants, 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.

7. For modification and/or deletion of any of the conditions herein above, the applicant/s will be at liberty to approach the concerned Court and such Court shall decide the application for modification and/or deletion of any of the conditions of this order in accordance with law.

8. 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.

9. Rule made absolute. Application is disposed of accordingly.

10. Direct service is permitted.

[ANANT S. DAVE, J.]

//smita//