Gujarat High Court
Jigarbhai Maheshbhai Chauhan vs State Of Gujarat on 5 August, 2024
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/9775/2024 ORDER DATED: 05/08/2024
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL) NO. 9775
of 2024
==========================================================
JIGARBHAI MAHESHBHAI CHAUHAN & ANR.
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR ASHISH M DAGLI(2203) for the Applicant(s) No. 1,2
MR A A ZABUAWALA(6823) for the Respondent(s) No. 1
MR. HARDIK S. SONI, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M. R. MENGDEY
Date : 05/08/2024
ORAL ORDER
1. By way of the present application under Section 438 of the Code of
Criminal Procedure, 1973, the Applicants have prayed for enlarging them on
anticipatory bail in connection with the FIR being C .R. No.
1 1 2 0 5 0 4 3 2 4 0 3 7 9 / 2 0 2 4 registered with 'B' Division Police Station,
Bhuj, Kachahh for the offences punishable under Sections 306, 452, 323,
294(B), 141, 143, 354 of the Indian Penal Code.
2. Heard learned Advocate Mr. Ashish M. Dagli for the Applicants,
learned APP Mr. Hardik S. Soni for the Respondent - State and learned
Advocate Mr. A.A.Zabuawala appearing on behalf of the Original
Complainant.
3. Rule. Learned APP Mr. Hardik S. Soni waives service of notice of
Rule on behalf of the Respondent - State and learned Advocate Mr.
A.A.Zabuawala waives servicer of notice of Rule on behalf of the Original
Complainant.
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/9775/2024 ORDER DATED: 05/08/2024
undefined
4. Learned Advocate for the Applicants has submitted that the Applicants
are apprehending their arrest in connection the aforesaid FIR and in this
connection the earlier application filed by the Applicants before the learned
Sessions Court came to be dis-allowed. He therefore submitted that the
present application may be allowed and the Applicants may be enlarged on
anticipatory bail subject to suitable conditions.
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. He submitted that the names of the present
Applicants have been specifically mentioned in the suicide note by the
deceased. The Applicants have played active role in commission of the offence
in question as they have entered the house of the deceased and had manhandled
the deceased and had also misbehaved with her. Learned APP therefore
submitted that the present Application may be dismissed.
6. Learned Advocate Mr. A.A. Zabuawala appearing on behalf of the
Original Complainant has also opposed the Application contending that the
present Applicants have played an active role in commission of the offence in
question. The deceased was constantly tortured by the present Applicants. On
the date of incident, the present Applicants had entered the house of the
deceased, manhandled her, and had also misbehaved with her. The Applicants
are the headstrong persons. He therefore submitted to dismiss the present
Application.
7. Having heard the arguments advanced by the learned advocates
for the parties and perusing the material placed on record and taking into
consideration the facts of the case, it appears that because of scarcity of water
in the area where the deceased and the present Applicant were residing,
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/9775/2024 ORDER DATED: 05/08/2024
undefined
there had been some scuffle on 9.04.2024 which had resulted into an
untoward incident of the deceased being manhandled by the present
Applicants. However, no complaint in this regard had been lodged by the
deceased or her daughter on the very day. The incident of deceased
committing suicide had taken place on 13.04.2024. The other co-accused
have been considered for grant of anticipatory bail by the learned Sessions
Court. Considering these aspects, the present Application deserves to be
allowed.
8. This Court has considered following aspects,
(a) as per catena of decisions of Hon'ble Supreme Court there are
mainly two factors which are required to be considered by this court;
(i) prima facie case
(ii) requirement of accused for custodial interrogation.
Therefore, in the facts and circumstances of the present case, this
court is inclined to consider the case of the applicants.
9. This Court has also taken into consideration the law laid down
by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre
Vs. State of Maharashtra and Ors., reported at [2011] 1 SCC 694, wherein
the Hon'ble Apex Court reiterated the law laid down by the Constitution Bench
in the case of Shri Gurubaksh Singh Sibbia & Ors. Vs. State of Punjab,
reported at (1980) 2 SCC 565. Further, this Court has also taken into
consideration the ratio laid down in the case of Sushila Aggarwal and Ors. v.
State (NCT of Delhi) and Anr. in Special Leave Petition No. 7281-
7282/2017 dated 29.01.2020.
9.1 This court has also considered the judgment in the case of Arnesh
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/9775/2024 ORDER DATED: 05/08/2024
undefined
Kumar v. State of Bihar reported in (2014) 8 SCC 273, wherein the Hon'ble
Apex Court has observe that whenever there is punishment of 7 years, then the
court would be liberal to exercise the discretion. Further, by exercising the
discretion under Section 438 Cr.P.C, the doors of remand by the Investigating
Officer is open and therefore also this court is inclined to exercise powers
under Section 438 of Cr.P.C.
10. In the result, the present application is allowed. The applicants are
ordered to be released on anticipatory bail in the event of their arrest in
connection with a F I R be i ng C . R. No . 1 1 2 0 5 0 4 3 2 4 0 3 7 9 / 2 0 2 4
registered wit h 'B' Division Police Station, Bhuj, Kachahh for the
offe nce s puni sha bl e unde r S ec tions 306, 452, 323, 294(B), 141, 143, 354
of the Indian Penal Code, on executing a personal bond of Rs.10,000/-
(Rupees Ten Thousand Only) each with one surety of like amount on the
following conditions;
(a) shall cooperate with the investigation and make available for
interrogation whenever required;
(b) shall remain present at concerned Police Station on 8.08.2024 between
12.00 Noon 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;
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/9775/2024 ORDER DATED: 05/08/2024
undefined
(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; and
11. At the trial, the concerned trial court shall not be influenced by the
prima facie observations made by this Court in the present order.
12. Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent. Direct service is
permitted.
(M. R. MENGDEY,J)
J.N.W / 6
