Gujarat High Court
Bhadoriya Ajaykumar Mukutsinh vs State Of Gujarat on 25 June, 2024
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/11381/2024 ORDER DATED: 25/06/2024
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL) NO. 11381
of 2024
==========================================================
BHADORIYA AJAYKUMAR MUKUTSINH
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT
==========================================================
Appearance:
J M TALOTA(7443) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR. J. K. SHAH, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M. R. MENGDEY
Date : 25/06/2024
ORAL ORDER
1. Rule. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor
waives service of notice for and on behalf of the
respondent State.
2. 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 be i ng C. R.
No . 1 1 1 9 1 0 1 0 2 4 0 2 9 3 of 2024 registered wit h
Madhavpura Police Station, District Ahmedabad.
3. Heard learned Advocate for the Applicant
and learned APP for the Respondent - State.
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/11381/2024 ORDER DATED: 25/06/2024
undefined
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 Sessions Court
came to be dis-allowed. He submitted that
considering the facts stated in the
Application, the applicant may be granted
anticipatory bail.
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.
Learned APP has therefore prayed that the present
Application may be dismissed.
6. Heard learned Advocates for the parties
the arguments advanced by the learned advocates
for the parties and perused the material
available on record.
7. The present applicant is alleged to be a
purchaser of the 456 bottles of contraband liquor
worth Rs.72,960/-. It appears from the record
that the present applicant is arraigned as an
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/11381/2024 ORDER DATED: 25/06/2024
undefined
accused on the statement of co-accused. Having
regard to the seriousness of offence and so also
the fact that the applicant does not appear to
have any other antecedents, 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.
Therefore, in the facts and circumstances
of the present case, this court is inclined to
consider the case of the applicant.
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
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/11381/2024 ORDER DATED: 25/06/2024
undefined
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 with the aforesaid F.I.R. on
executing a personal bond of Rs.10,000/- with
one surety of like amount on the following
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/11381/2024 ORDER DATED: 25/06/2024
undefined
conditions;
(a) shall cooperate with the
investigation and make available for
interrogation whenever required;
(b) shall remain present at concerned
Police Station on 29 .0 6. 2 0 24 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
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/11381/2024 ORDER DATED: 25/06/2024
undefined
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)
NABILA
