Gujarat High Court
Madhuben W/O Mukeshbhai Whadher vs Pankaj Nanjibhai Chudasama on 23 January, 2024
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/18571/2021 ORDER DATED: 23/01/2024
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR CANCELLATION OF BAIL) NO.
18571 of 2021
==========================================================
MADHUBEN W/O MUKESHBHAI WHADHER
Versus
PANKAJ NANJIBHAI CHUDASAMA
==========================================================
Appearance:
HCLS COMMITTEE(4998) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MS KHUSHBU P VYAS(7040) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR ARJUN RATHOD for AADITYA D BHATT(8580) for the Respondent(s)
No. 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9
CHANDNI S JOSHI(9490) for the Respondent(s) No. 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9
MS ASMITA PATEL, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 10
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE J. C. DOSHI
Date : 23/01/2024
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 22.1.2021 passed by the
learned Sessions Judge, Porbandar in Criminal Misc. Application
No.489 of 2020, 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 would submit that the
respondent accused has breached condition No.5 passed in
Criminal Misc. Application No.489 of 2020, by which, the
petitioner enlarged on anticipatory bail. She would further
submit that one chapter case was registered against the
respondent accused on 29.5.2020 and page 31A indicates that
the petitioner has breached condition No.5 passed in Criminal
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/18571/2021 ORDER DATED: 23/01/2024
undefined
Misc. Application No.489 of 2020 by passing threat to the
witnesses so as to dissuade the witnesses from disclosing such
facts to the Court or to the police officers and therefore, she
requests to allow this petition.
4. On the other hand, learned advocate for the respondents
there is no breach of condition, it is just an allegation levelled by
way of registering chapter case. He would further submit that
the respondent is not directly or indirectly involved in passing
threat to the witnesses so as to dissuade the witnesses from
disclosing such facts to the Court or to the police officers.
Therefore, he requests to dismiss the petition.
5. Having heard learned advocates for both the parties, at the
outset, what appears that merely because chapter case is
registered against the respondent accused, it cannot be said that
condition of the bail has been breached. The learned Sessions
Court has rightly observed in para 6.3 of the impugned order
that there was no specific date or place mentioned in the chapter
case, which can be termed as threat or promise.
6. 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
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/18571/2021 ORDER DATED: 23/01/2024
undefined
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
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.'
7. 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.
8. 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."
9. Resultantly, present petition fails and stands dismissed.
Notice discharged.
(J. C. DOSHI,J)
SHEKHAR P. BARVE
