Gujarat High Court
Pareshbhai Chandubhai Kashundra vs State Of Gujarat on 28 January, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/24650/2024 ORDER DATED: 28/01/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR SUCCESSIVE ANTICIPATORY
BAIL) NO. 24650 of 2024
==========================================================
PARESHBHAI CHANDUBHAI KASHUNDRA
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR. NIPUL H GONDALIA(6894) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR. VATSAL D. RUPAREL(14194) for the Respondent(s) No. 1
MR NIRAJ SHARMA, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M. R. MENGDEY
Date : 28/01/2025
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 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha
Sanhita, 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 2 0 3 0 3 0 2 4 0 6 6 3 of 2024 registered wit h
Keshod Police Station, District - Junagadh for
the offence punishable under Sections 308(2) of
the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and Sections 40,
42(a) and 42(D) of the Gujarat Money Lenders Act.
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/24650/2024 ORDER DATED: 28/01/2025
undefined
3. 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. Learned advocate for the
applicant has submitted that considering the
facts stated in the Application, the applicant
may be granted anticipatory bail.
4. 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 submitted that the applicant had lent
money to the first informant at hefty rate of
interest and though, the first informant had paid
the substantial amount out of the said amount,
the applicant herein had taken vehicle belonging
to the first informant as well as other items
including two cheque books which contained signed
cheques which had not been returned to the first
informant by the present applicant. Learned APP
has therefore prayed that the present Application
may be dismissed.
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/24650/2024 ORDER DATED: 28/01/2025
undefined
5. Learned advocate appearing for the
original complainant has opposed the present
application inter alia contending that the
applicant had handed over certain goods to the
first informant including certain cameras and two
cheque books including signed cheques by the
first informant and the said items have not been
returned to the first informant by the present
applicant. He has, therefore, submitted to
dismiss the present application.
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. From the record it appears that some
financial transactions had taken place between
the present applicant wherein the present
applicant initially lent the amount of Rs.1 Lakh
to the first informant and thereafter, again lent
amount of Rs.30,000/- to the first informant. It
is also case on behalf of the prosecution that
though out of the aforesaid amount, substantial
amount had been paid, the applicant had taken car
and several other items including cheque books
including signed cheques which were not returned
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/24650/2024 ORDER DATED: 28/01/2025
undefined
to the first informant. Having regard to the
nature of dispute involved in the present
offence, 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 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
Constitution Bench in the case of Shri Gurubaksh
Singh Sibbia & Ors. Vs. State of Punjab,
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/24650/2024 ORDER DATED: 28/01/2025
undefined
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.
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
conditions;
(a) shall cooperate with the
investigation and make available for
interrogation whenever required;
(b) shall remain present at concerned
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/24650/2024 ORDER DATED: 28/01/2025
undefined
Police Station on 04 .0 2. 2 0 25 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
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/24650/2024 ORDER DATED: 28/01/2025
undefined
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
