Vijaykumar Gandabhai Rabari vs State Of Gujarat
2023 Latest Caselaw 7643 Guj

                                                                                    NEUTRAL CITATION




     R/CR.MA/18340/2023                                ORDER DATED: 16/10/2023

                                                                                     undefined




             IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
   R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR SUCCESSIVE ANTICIPATORY BAIL -
                BEFORE CHARGESHEET) NO. 18340 of 2023
==========================================================
                    VIJAYKUMAR GANDABHAI RABARI
                                   Versus
                            STATE OF GUJARAT
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR VIRAJ B KHATANA(10416) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MS SHRUTI PATHAK, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
   CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HASMUKH D. SUTHAR
                              Date : 16/10/2023
                                ORAL ORDER

1. RULE. Learned advocates for the respective parties waive service of notice of Rule.

2. By way of the present application under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, the applicant accused has prayed to release him on anticipatory bail in the event of his arrest in connection with the FIR being C.R. No.11191067230013 of 2023 with Cyber Crime Police Station, Ahmedabad for the offences punishable under Sections 406, 420, 120B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Sections 43A, 66(c) and 66(d) of the Information Technology Act.

3. It seems that an anticipatory bail application filed by the present applicant, being Criminal Misc. Application No. 15922 of 2023, came to be withdrawn on 25.09.2203.

4. Learned advocate for the applicant submits that the nature of allegations are such for which custodial interrogation at this stage is not necessary. Besides, the

NEUTRAL CITATION

R/CR.MA/18340/2023 ORDER DATED: 16/10/2023

undefined

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. Learned advocate for the applicant, on instructions, states 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 would further submit that upon filing of such application by the Investigating Agency, the right of applicant accused to oppose such application on merits may be kept open.

5. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the respondent - State has opposed grant of anticipatory bail looking to the nature and gravity of the offence and submitted that the applicant had previously filed an application for anticipatory bail, being Criminal Misc. Application No. 15922 of 2023, which was withdrawn on 25.09.2023. Since then, there has been no change in circumstances in the case. Therefore, learned APP submits that the application be dismissed.

6. Heard learned advocates for the respective parties.

7. Having gone through the papers available on record, it appears that an application for anticipatory bail, being Criminal Misc. Application No. 15922 of 2023 was withdrawn on 25.09.2023 as the Court was not inclined to

NEUTRAL CITATION

R/CR.MA/18340/2023 ORDER DATED: 16/10/2023

undefined

pass any relief in favour of the applicant. Since then, there has been no change in circumstances in the case. However, the present successive application for anticipatory bail has been filed by the applicant without any change the circumstances on 29.9.2023 i.e. within four days.

8. In view of the above, as there is no change in the circumstances meaning thereby the reason assigned by the learned Sessions Judge attained the finality and in absence of any change in the circumstances, the present application for anticipatory bail deserves to be dismissed in light of the law laid down by this Court in the case of State of Gujarat vs Kanksinh Mohansinh Mangrola, reported in (2005) 1 GLH 665, wherein the Court held as under:

"While deciding the second successive anticipatory bail application of the respondent no.1-accused, learned Sessions Judge has not taken into consideration the following aspects. Due to change in circumstance, party can approach the court below or the High Court under Sec.438 of the Code and court can deal with that point of change in circumstance only. However, the court cannot enter into the grounds which were previously contested by the parties and have become final. Here in this case, court below has violated the basic principle of law laid down by the Apex Court on this point by dealing with all points raised by the accused in the first application filed under Sec.438 of the Code and which were already decided by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Surat, in detail with prima-facie reasons. Said order was carried further by the accused in the High Court and at the end of arguments, it was withdrawn and hence it has become final between the parties and hence, learned Sessions Judge should not have dealt with the same points again in the successive anticipatory applications."

NEUTRAL CITATION

R/CR.MA/18340/2023 ORDER DATED: 16/10/2023

undefined

9. Despite the dismissal of earlier bail applications, the applicant has filed this subsequent anticipatory bail application without any change in the circumstances of this case. In this regard also, reference needs to be made to the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of G.R. Ananda Babu vs The State of Tamil Nadu, reported in 2021 SCC Online SC 176.

10. In view of the above, the present application stands dismissed. Rule discharged.

(HASMUKH D. SUTHAR,J) ALI