Gujarat High Court
Vishal Rameshbhai Gandhi vs State Of Gujarat on 29 June, 2021
Bench: A.S. Supehia
R/CR.MA/8153/2021 ORDERDATED:29/06/2021
IN THEHIGHCOURTOF GUJARATAT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINALMISC.APPLICATIONNO. 8153of 2021
==============================================================================
VISHALRAMESHBHAIGANDHI
Versus
STATEOF GUJARAT
==============================================================================
Appearance:
MRHARDIKA DAVE(3764)for the Applicant(s)No. 1
MR.HIMANSHUK PATEL,APPfor the Respondent(s)No. 1
==============================================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.S. SUPEHIA
Date: 29/06/2021
ORALORDER
[1] Heard the learned advocates for the respective parties by video
conferencing.
[2] By way of the present application filed under Section 438 of the
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, the applicant-accused has
prayed for bail in connection with the FIR being C.R. No.I-
11191017210058 of 2021 registered with Gujarat Univesity
Police Station, Ahmedabad City, District Ahmedabad for the
offences under Sections 406, 420 and 114 of the Indian Penal Code,
1860.
[3] At the outset, learned advocate Mr.Hardik Dave appearing on
behalf of the applicant has submitted that main accused who is
having graver role in the present offence is released on
anticipatory bail by the Co-ordinate Bench vide order dated
28.04.2021 passed in Criminal Misc. Application no.5394 of 2021.
He has submitted that allegations levelled in the F.I.R. is that the
co-accused, Darshan Pravinchandra Vyas and the applicant has not
been paid out of total 58,55,000/- despite there being an MOU
R/CR.MA/8153/2021 ORDERDATED:29/06/2021
executed between the complainant and the accused. It is alleged
that the accused have closed the company after getting the
investment of Rs.58,55,000/- without informing the complainant. It
is submitted that proceeding under Section 138 of the Negotiable
Instrument Act are also undertaken and initiated against the
present applicant.
[4] It is further submitted that the allegations levelled in the FIR
are of the year 2019 and the cheques were also given in the year
2020 and the FIR has been registered after delay of two years on
17.02.2021. Thus, it is submitted that in fact this action is
converted civil transaction into criminal nature. It is submitted that
the applicant was in judicial custody for the offences under
Sections 406,420 of Indian Penal Code, which was registered at
Police Station Sector - 37, District Gurugram. The High Court of
Punjab and Hariyana at Chhattisgarh has released the applicant by
granting regular bail in judgment dated 08.03.2021.
[5] Learned advocate for the applicant, upon instructions, has
submitted that the applicant is ready and willing to abide by all the
conditions, including imposition of conditions with regard to
powers of investigating agency to file an application before the
competent Court for his remand. He has further submitted that
upon filing of such application by the investigating agency, the
right of the applicant accused to oppose such application on merits
may be kept open. Learned advocate, therefore, has submitted that
considering the above facts, the applicant may be granted
anticipatory bail.
[6] Learned advocate Mr.R.J.Goswami appearing for the
complainant has submitted that the complainant has been cheated
by the accused for total amount of Rs.58,55,000/-. He has
submitted that the applicant is directly involved in the offence and
in fact the cheques issued by the applicant and co-accused have
bounced, for which, proceeding under Negotiable Instrument Act
are filed against them. It is further submitted that applicant is
R/CR.MA/8153/2021 ORDERDATED:29/06/2021
having one antecedent at Punjab and therefore, he may not be
released on bail.
[7] Learned APP has also supported the argument advanced by
learned advocate Mr.R.J.Goswami and has submitted that looking
to the complicity of the applicant, he may not be released on bail.
[8] The Court has considered rival submissions advanced by the
advocates for the respective parties and taking into consideration
the facts of the case, nature of allegations, gravity of offences, role
attributed to the accused and the release of co-accused by the Co-
ordinate Bench vide judgment dated 28.04.2021 passed in Criminal
Misc. Application No.5394 of 2021. On the ground of parity,
present applicant required to be released on bail as the contents of
the FIR suggests that his role is similar to that of co-accused.
[9] This Court has considered following aspects;
(a) The co-accused having similar role has been released on anti
bail by the Co-ordinate Bench;
(b) There is delay of two years in registration of FIR;
(c) Considering the facts of the case, the custodial interrogation of
the applicant at this stage is not necessary;
This Court has also taken into consideration the law laid down by
the Apex Court in the cases of Sushila Aggarwal vs. State (Nct of
Delhi), AIR 2020 SC 831 and Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre vs
State of Maharashtra, A.I.R. 2011 S.C. 312.
[10] In the result, the present application is allowed. The applicant
is ordered to be released on bail in the event of his arrest in
connection with FIR being C.R. No.I- 11191017210058 of 2021
registered with Gujarat Univesity Police Station, Ahmedabad
City, District Ahmedabad on his executing a personal bond of
Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand Only) with one surety of like
amount on the following conditions that he :
R/CR.MA/8153/2021 ORDERDATED:29/06/2021
(a) shall cooperate with the investigation and make himself
available for interrogation whenever required;
(b) shall remain present at the concerned Police Station on
08.07.2021 between 11.00 a.m. and 2.00 p.m.;
(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 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) shall not leave India without the permission of the concerned
trial court and if having passport shall deposit the same before the
concerned trial court within a week.
[11] Despite this order, it would be open for the investigating
agency to apply to the competent Magistrate, for police remand of
the applicant, if he considers it proper and just and the Magistrate
would decide it on merits. The applicant shall remain present
before the concerned Magistrate on the first date of hearing of
such application and on all subsequent occasions, as may be
directed by the concerned Magistrate. This would be sufficient to
treat the accused in the judicial custody for the purpose of
entertaining the 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 concerned 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
R/CR.MA/8153/2021 ORDERDATED:29/06/2021
conditions of this anticipatory bail order.
[12] At the trial, the concerned trial court shall not be influenced
by the prima facie observations made by this Court in the present
order.
[13] The application is allowed in the aforesaid terms. RULE is
made absolute to the aforesaid extent. Registry is directed to send
a copy of this order to the concerned authority / court through Fax
message, email and/or any other suitable electronic mode.
[14] Learned advocate for the applicant is also permitted to send
a copy of this order to the concerned authority/court through Fax
message, email and/or any other suitable electronic mode.
(A. S. SUPEHIA,J)
NABILA
