Yogeshkumar Navinchandra Doshi vs State Of Gujarat

Gujarat High Court

Yogeshkumar Navinchandra Doshi vs State Of Gujarat on 20 February, 2025

                                                                                                            NEUTRAL CITATION




                            R/CR.MA/2587/2025                                 ORDER DATED: 20/02/2025

                                                                                                            undefined




                               IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
                       R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL) NO. 2587
                                                  of 2025
                       ==========================================================
                                            YOGESHKUMAR NAVINCHANDRA DOSHI
                                                         Versus
                                                   STATE OF GUJARAT
                       ==========================================================
                       Appearance:
                       MR MAULIK NANAVATI for MR BHUNESH C RUPERA(3896) for the
                       Applicant(s) No. 1
                       MS DIPTI N CHOTAI(13120) for the Respondent(s) No. 1
                       MR HD MEHTA, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
                       ==========================================================
                         CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HASMUKH D. SUTHAR

                                                     Date : 20/02/2025

                                                      ORAL ORDER

[1.0] RULE. Learned APP waives service of rule for the respondent-State.

[2.0] By way of the present application under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, the applicant accused has prayed to release him/her on anticipatory bail in the event of her arrest in connection with the FIR being C.R. No. 11191036240164 /2024 registered with registered with Navrangpura Police Station, Ahmedabad City, for the offences punishable under Sections 384, 506(1) and 114 of Indian Penal Code, 1860.

[3.0] Learned Advocate for the applicant submits that the applicant has nothing to do with the offence and he is falsely enroped in the offence. It is submitted that the complainant and co-accused were in relationship and they got married. The present applicant is a practicing advocate. It is alleged that to settle the dispute, the present applicant has visited to the Old High Court Building and on behalf of the complainant forcing to settle the dispute and demanded Rs.25 lakh towards the settlement and stated that the if the said amount is not paid, he will pose the false case against the complainant and drag into false litigation. Applicant is facing charge under Page 1 of 5 Uploaded by KUMAR ALOK(HC01091) on Thu Feb 20 2025 Downloaded on : Thu Feb 20 22:35:58 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/2587/2025 ORDER DATED: 20/02/2025 undefined Section 384, 506(1) and 114 of Indian Penal Code, 1860. It is submitted that no offence is committed and there is no delivery of money. Now nothing is required to be recovered and discovered from the accused. Therefore no custodial interrogation is required. Besides, the applicant is available during the course of investigation and will not flee from justice. In view of the above, the applicant may be granted anticipatory bail.

[4.0] Learned APP and learned advocate for the original Complainant have opposed the present application and submitted that present applicant is a kingpin and he tried to extort the money of Rs.25 lakh in the pretext of settlement, threatening that if the settlement is not taken place, he will pose the false case against the complainant and drag into false litigation. In this regard, complaint is lodged. It is submitted that Whatsapp chat and other conversation is also annexed with the reply. Hence, as custodial interrogation of the applicant is required, he has requested to dismiss the present application.

[5.0] Having heard the learned advocate for the parties and perusing the investigation papers, it is equally incumbent upon the Court to exercise its discretion judiciously, cautiously and strictly in compliance with the basic principles laid down in a plethora of decisions of the Hon'ble Apex Court on the point. It is well settled that, among other circumstances, the factors to be borne in mind while considering an application for bail are (i) the nature and gravity of the accusation; (ii) the antecedents of the applicant including the fact as to whether he has previously undergone imprisonment on conviction by a Court in respect of any cognizable offence; (iii) the possibility of the applicant to flee from justice; and (iv) where the accusation has been made with the object of injuring or humiliating the applicant by having him so arrested. Though at the stage of granting bail an elaborate examination of evidence and detailed reasons touching the merit of the case, which may prejudice the accused, should be avoided. I have considered the following aspects :

NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/2587/2025 ORDER DATED: 20/02/2025 undefined (1) Offence is not punishable with life imprisonment or death penalty; (2) prima facie, it appears that dispute is between the complainant and accused No.2, who is wife. The present applicant is engaged as an advocate by the accused no.2, wife of the complainant and on behalf of accused no.2, he has contacted the present applicant and settlement talk took place and for the one time settlement, demand of rs.25 lakh has been made and there is no any delivery of money and settlement talks. Thereafter, no any alleged offence is committed and neither delivery of Rs.25 lakhs is made nor false complaint or any proceeding is filed against the accused No.2 at the behest of the present applicant;

(3) Offence is punishable upto 7 years and No notice under Section 35 of the BNS/41(A) of Cr.P.C. came to be issued. Notice is served through whatsapp;

(4) No antecedent is reported against the applicant; (5) nothing is required to be recovered and discovered from the accused;

[6.0] Considering the aforesaid aspects and the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre vs. State of Maharashtra and Ors. reported in (2011) 1 SCC 6941, wherein the Hon'ble Apex Court reiterated the law laid down by the Constitution Bench in the case of Shri Gurubaksh Singh Sibbia & Ors. reported in (1980) 2 SCC 665 and also the decision in the case of Sushila Aggarwal v. State (NCT of Delhi) reported in (2020) 5 SCC 1, I am inclined to allow the present application.

[6.1] This court has also considered the judgment in the case of Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar reported in (2014) 8 SCC 273, Satender Kumar Antil v. Central Bureau of Investigation & Anr. reported in (2022)10 SCC 51 and Md. Asfak Alam vs. State of Jharkhand and Another reported in 2023 SCC OnLine SC 892 wherein the Hon'ble Apex Court has observe that Page 3 of 5 Uploaded by KUMAR ALOK(HC01091) on Thu Feb 20 2025 Downloaded on : Thu Feb 20 22:35:58 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/2587/2025 ORDER DATED: 20/02/2025 undefined whenever there is punishment of 7 years, then the court would be liberal to exercise the discretion.

[7.0] In the result, the present application is allowed by directing that in the event of arrest / appearance of the applicant in connection with the FIR being C.R. No. 11191036240164 /2024 registered with registered with Navrangpura Police Station, Ahmedabad City, the applicant shall be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand Only) with one surety of like amount on the following conditions that applicant :

(a) shall cooperate with the investigation and make himself available for interrogation whenever required;

(b) shall remain present at the concerned Police Station on 28/02/2025 between 11.00 a.m. and 2.00 p.m. and the IO shall ensure that no unnecessary harassment or inconvenience is caused to the applicant;

(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 UIDAI Number, Contact Number/s, Passport Number (if he is having the passport), E-mail address and present address of his residence 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) shall not leave India without the permission of the Court and if having passport shall deposit the same before the Trial Court within a week;

(g) an order of anticipatory bail does not in any manner limit or restrict the rights or duties of the police or investigative agency, to investigate into the charges against the person who seeks and is granted pre-arrest bail;

NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/2587/2025 ORDER DATED: 20/02/2025 undefined

(h) It is open to the police or the investigating agency to move the learned trial Court for a direction under Section 483(2) to arrest the accused, in the event of violation of any term, such as absconding, non-cooperating during investigation, evasion, intimidation or inducement to witnesses with a view to influence outcome of the investigation or trial, etc.-

[8.0] 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.

[9.0] Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent. Application is disposed of accordingly. Direct service is permitted.

(HASMUKH D. SUTHAR,J) KUMAR ALOK Page 5 of 5 Uploaded by KUMAR ALOK(HC01091) on Thu Feb 20 2025 Downloaded on : Thu Feb 20 22:35:58 IST 2025