Gujarat High Court
Atulbhai Valjibhai Sanga vs State Of Gujarat on 11 January, 2024
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/22214/2023 ORDER DATED: 11/01/2024
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR CANCELLATION OF BAIL) NO.
22214 of 2023
In R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION NO. 4632 of 2021
==========================================================
ATULBHAI VALJIBHAI SANGA
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR GAURANG K CHAUHAN(9858) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
for the Respondent(s) No. 2
MS ASMITA PATEL, ADDL. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for the Respondent(s)
No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE J. C. DOSHI
Date : 11/01/2024
ORAL ORDER
1. By way of the present petition under Section 439(2) of the
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, the petitioner has prayed to
quash and set aside the order dated 10.8.2021 passed by the
Coordinate Bench of this Court in Criminal Misc. Application
No.4632 of 2021, whereby the learned Session Judge has
granted bail to the respondent - original accused.
2. Heard learned advocate for the petitioner.
3. Learned advocate for the petitioner though strongly argued
to cancel the bail on submission that while granting anticipatory
bail to the respondent accused, the Coordinate Bench of this
Court has imposed certain conditions and one of the conditions
is that shall not leave State of Gujarat without prior permission
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/22214/2023 ORDER DATED: 11/01/2024
undefined
of the concerned Court till filing of the charge sheet. He would
further submit that still the charge sheet has not been filed in
the present case. Referring to annexure at Annexure D, he
would submit that still, the respondent accused, without prior
permission of the concerned Court, travelled to Haryana,
whereupon, one offence was also registered against him. This
prima facie indicates violation of condition. Upon such
submission, he requests to allow this petition.
4. Having gone through the facts of the case, learned
advocate for the petitioner has failed to point out that the
respondent has breached the condition. Merely placing reliance
upon the copy of the FIR registered against identical name of the
person as that of the respondent accused, would not make the
case that the respondent has travelled outside State of Gujarat.
It is also placed on record status of the investigation to submit
that the investigation is still not completed. Under these
circumstances, this appears to be pressurizing tactics and
therefore, present petition deserves fate of dismissal only.
5. In Bhagwan Singh v Dilip Kumar @ Deepu @ Depak
reported in 2023 INSC 7613, this Court after considering
judgment in case of Dolat Ram v State of Haryana, (1995) 1 SCC
349; Kashmira Singh v Duman Singh, (1996) 4 SCC 693 and X v
State of Telangana, (2018) 16 SCC 511, held as follows:
'13. It is also required to be borne in mind that when a prayer is
made for the cancellation of grant of bail cogent and
overwhelming circumstances must be present and bail once
granted cannot be cancelled in a mechanical manner without
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/22214/2023 ORDER DATED: 11/01/2024
undefined
considering whether any supervening circumstances have
rendered it in conducing to allow fair trial. This proposition draws
support from the Judgment of this Court in Daulat Ram and
others v. State of Haryana reported in (1995) 1 SCC 349,
Kashmira Singh v. Duman Singh (1996) 4 SCC 693 and xxx v.
State of Telangana (2018) 16 SCC 511.'
6. Thus, this Court finds no circumstances to adjudge the
impugned order as unjust and contrary to the settled principles
of law. As held earlier, the petitioner has failed to point out
supervening circumstances, which may interfere with the fair
trial. It is also required to be noted that the entire investigation
is stayed by the Division Bench of this Court vide order dated
5.9.2022 passed in Special Criminal Application No.9090 of
2022.
7. Before parting with the order, I may also refer the
observations made in the recent decision by the Hon'ble Apex
Court in case of Kekhriesatuo Tep and others Vs.National
Investigating Agency reported in (2023) 6 SCC 58. The relevant
observation made in para 20 reads as under:-
"20. An interference by an Appellate Court and particularly in a
matter when liberty granted to a citizen was being taken away
would be warranted only in the event the view taken by the Trial
Court was either perverse or impossible. On this limited ground,
we find that the appeals deserve to be allowed."
8. Resultantly, present petition fails and stands dismissed.
(J. C. DOSHI,J)
SHEKHAR P. BARVE
