Gujarat High Court
Pravinkumar Natwarlal Patel vs State Of Gujarat on 12 June, 2024
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/10545/2024 ORDER DATED: 12/06/2024
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL) NO. 10545
of 2024
==========================================================
PRAVINKUMAR NATWARLAL PATEL
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR DIPEN DESAI(2481) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR HARDIK SONI, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M. R. MENGDEY
Date : 12/06/2024
ORAL ORDER
1. By way of the present application under Section 438 of the Code
of Criminal Procedure, 1973, the applicant-accused has prayed for
enlarging the Applicant on anticipatory bail in connection with the FIR
being C.R. No. 11216022210349 of 2021 registered wit h Kalol Taluka
Police Station, Gandhinagar for the offences punishable under Sections
465, 467, 468, 471, 120B and 506(2) of the Indian Penal Code as well
as Sections 5(a), 5(c) and 5(e) of the Gujarat Land Grabbing Act.
2. Heard learned Advocate for the Applicant and learned APP for the
Respondent - State.
3. Rule. Learned APP waives service of notice of Rule on behalf of the
Respondent - State.
4. Learned Advocate for the Applicant has submitted that the
Applicant is apprehending arrest in connection the aforesaid FIR and in this
connection the earlier application filed by the Applicant before the learned
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/10545/2024 ORDER DATED: 12/06/2024
undefined
Sessions Court came to be dis-allowed.
5. 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 the remand. It is further
submitted 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. Learned advocate, therefore, submitted that considering the above facts,
the applicant may be granted anticipatory bail.
6. Learned A P P appearing on behalf of the respondent - State
has opposed grant of anticipatory bail contending that the present applicant is
the beneficiary of the entire transaction. The forged Power of Attorney was
executed in favour of the father of the present applicant, who in turn, on the
basis of the said Power of Attorney had executed a sale deed in favour of the
present applicant. Thus the applicant is a direct beneficiary of the entire
offence. He therefore submitted that looking to the nature of offence the
Application may be dismissed.
7. Heard learned Advocates for the parties and perused the record. As
per the case of prosecution, the forged Power of Attorney came to be executed
in favor of the father of the applicant. The said Power of Attorney was
allegedly forged, as it did not contain the signatures of the original stake
holders in the land in question. From the record it appears that the first
informant came to know about the incident in the year 2019, however, the FIR
came to be lodged in the year 2021. Interestingly, the first informant did not
take out any procedures to challenge the sale deed which was executed in favor
of the present applicant, though the same was allegedly on the basis of the
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/10545/2024 ORDER DATED: 12/06/2024
undefined
forged Power of Attorney. Considering the aforesaid aspect and considering the
nature of allegations levelled against the present Applicant, this Court is
inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the applicant.
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.
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
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 applicant is
ordered to be released on anticipatory bail in the event of arrest in connection
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/10545/2024 ORDER DATED: 12/06/2024
undefined
with a FIR being C.R. No. 11216022210349 of 2021 registered wit h Kalol
Taluka Police Station, Gandhinagar for the offences punishable under
Sections 465, 467, 468, 471, 120B and 506(2) of the Indian Penal Code
as well as Sections 5(a), 5(c) and 5(e) of the Gujarat Land Grabbing
Act, on executing a personal bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand
Only) 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 2 2 . 6 . 2 0 2 4
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;
(e) shall at the time of execution of bond, furnish the address to the
investigating officer and the court concerned and shall not change 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
(g) it would be open to the Investigating Officer to file an application for
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/10545/2024 ORDER DATED: 12/06/2024
undefined
remand if he considers it proper and just and the learned Magistrate would
decide the remand application without being influenced of the observations
made by this Court;
11. The applicant shall remain present before the learned Magistrate on
the first date of hearing of such application and on all subsequent occasions, as
may be directed by the learned Magistrate. This would be sufficient to treat the
accused in the judicial custody for the purpose of entertaining application of
the prosecution for police remand. This is, however, without prejudice to the
right of the accused to seek stay against an order of remand, if, ultimately,
granted, and the power of the learned Magistrate to consider such a request
in accordance with law. It is clarified that the applicant, even if, remanded
to the police custody, upon completion of such period of police remand, shall
be set free immediately, subject to other conditions of this anticipatory bail
order.
12. At the trial, the concerned trial court shall not be influenced by the
prima facie observations made by this Court in the present order.
13. Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent. Direct service is
permitted.
(M. R. MENGDEY,J)
Manshi
