Gujarat High Court
Mahendrabhai Jayantilal Muliya vs State Of Gujarat on 8 November, 2023
Bench: M. R. Mengdey
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/17211/2023 ORDER DATED: 08/11/2023
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR REGULAR BAIL - AFTER
CHARGESHEET) NO. 17211 of 2023
==========================================================
MAHENDRABHAI JAYANTILAL MULIYA
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR HARSHADRAY R KAPADIYA(11640) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MS KRINA CALLA, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M. R. MENGDEY
Date : 08/11/2023
ORAL ORDER
1. Rule returnable forthwith. Learned APP waives service of
notice of rule for and on behalf of the respondent no.1-State.
2. The present bail application is filed under Section 439 of
the Code of Criminal Procedure by the applicant for regular
bail in connection with an FIR being C.R.No.
11211031210239 of 2021 registered with Limbdi Police
Station, District Surendranagar for the offence punishable
under Sections 463, 464, 465, 467, 471, 499, 500, 501 and
502 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. The brief facts of the present case are as under;
3.1 That, the complainant is the judicial officer in the Gujarat
Judiciary and complaint has been lodged against the applicant
alleging that the applicant has prepared bogus and forged
resignation letter of the complainant and sent it to the Hon'ble
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/17211/2023 ORDER DATED: 08/11/2023
undefined
the Chief Justice and Registrar General of the High Court of
Gujarat and thereby, the applicant tried to defame the
complainant and that is how, the complainant has lodged the
complaint under question.
4. Heard learned advocate for the applicant as well as
learned APP for the respondent-State.
5. Learned advocate for the applicant submits that
considering the nature of allegations, role attributed to the
applicant, the applicant may be enlarged on regular bail by
imposing suitable conditions. As per the prosecution case, the
forged letter of resignation of the first informant, who is the
judicial officer, was sent to the Hon'ble Chief Justice as well as
Registrar General of this High Court by the applicant, but the
present applicant has not forged any such letter of resignation.
The only material available on record that envelope, in which,
such letter was forwarded contains the hand writings of the
present applicant, except this, there is no material available on
record to involve the present applicant in the offence under
question.
6. Learned advocate for the applicant has further submitted
that the investigation of the present offence has been completed
and the investigating officer has filed charge sheet against the
present applicant. He further submits that in the judgment
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/17211/2023 ORDER DATED: 08/11/2023
undefined
passed by the Hon'ble Apex Court in case of Naval Dipakkumar
Thakkar v. State of Gujarat, (Criminal Appeal No.1161 of
2023), Hon'ble Apex Court has enlarged the concerned
applicant on bail since he was in judicial custody for more than
8 months and in the present case, the applicant has been
arrested in connection with the offence under question on 15 th
December 2022 and thus, he spent more than 10 months in
the custody. Ultimately, learned advocate for the applicant has
requested to enlarge the applicant on regular bail.
7. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf
of the respondent-State has opposed grant of regular bail
looking to the nature and gravity of the offence. That, the
applicant is involved in the serious offence as alleged and
therefore, no leniency view would be taken in favour of the
applicant while releasing him on bail as the present applicant
had forwarded the forged letter of resignation of the first
informant, who happens to be judicial officer, to the Hon'ble
Chief Justice as well as Registrar General of this High Court.
Hence, it was submitted by learned APP for the respondent-
State to reject present application.
8. Having heard learned advocate for the applicant as well
as learned APP for the respondent-State as well as documents
produced on record, it appears that the applicant had
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/17211/2023 ORDER DATED: 08/11/2023
undefined
forwarded the forged letter of resignation of the first
informant, who happens to be the Judicial Officer and at the
relevant point of time, the first informant was working as
Additional Sessions Judge at Limbdi, District Surendrangar. The
said letter was forwarded to Hon'ble the Chief Justice as well as
Registrar General of this High Court. The envelope, in which,
the said letter of resignation was forwarded to this court and
the hand writings on the said envelope were found to be of the
present applicant. Thus, it appears that by committing the
offence in question, the applicant has tried to tarnish the
reputation of the judicial officer(first informant) and has also
made an attempt to prejudice the career of the first informant.
It is also required to be noted at this stage that the applicant is
a practicing advocate.
9. Thus, considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances
of the case as well as considering the role played by the present
applicant in the offence under question, this court is not
inclined to accept the prayer made by applicant and
accordingly, present application stands rejected.
10. Rule stands discharged.
(M. R. MENGDEY,J)
K. S. DARJI
