Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Gaurav Parik vs State on 2 February, 2021
Bench: Devendra Kachhawaha
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 12096/2019
1. Gaurav Parik S/o Bhadresh Bhai Parik, Aged About 31
Years, Occupation-Business, B/c Parik, R/o Crave
International 157, Village Bhojpara At Kardej, Tehsil And
District Bhavnagar, Gujarat.
2. Bhadresh Bhai Parik S/o Ghanshyamlal, Aged About 57
Years, Occupation-Business, B/c Parik, R/o Crave
International 157, Village Bhojpara At Kardej, Tehsil And
District Bhavnagar, Gujarat.
----Petitioners
Versus
State, Through Government Pleader / Public Prosecutor.
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Sunil Kotia, through VC &
Mr. Teja Ram
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Mukhtiyar Khan, PP
Mr. Nishant Bora, for the complainant
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEVENDRA KACHHAWAHA
Order
02/02/2021
This application for anticipatory bail under Section 438
Cr.P.C. has been filed by the petitioners apprehending their arrest
in connection with F.I.R. No.306/2019 Police Station Sanchore,
District Jalore, for the offence under Sections 406 & 420 of the
Indian Penal Code.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned Public
Prosecutor and learned counsel for the complainant. Perused the
material available on record.
(2 of 3) [CRLMB-12096/2019]
Learned counsel for the petitioners stated that FIR was filed
after a delay of almost one year; in total, eight milk tankers were
supplied by the complainant itself, out of that, payment of five
tankers was undisputedly paid by the petitioners and payment of
remaining three tankers was not done as milk of three tankers
was found contaminated; there is a dispute regarding quality of
milk, therefore, payment was not made by the petitioners.
Learned counsel further stated that even after above dispute
further transactions took place between the parties and payment
of all remaining tankers were also paid by the petitioners. Lastly,
he urges that this dispute is purely of civil nature and instead of
filing a civil suit, the complainant has taken resort to criminal
proceeding. In support of his arguments learned counsel for the
petitioner has relied upon and cited the following judgment:
1. In the case of Prof. R.K. Vijayasarathy & Anr. Vs. Sudha
Seetharam & Anr. (Criminal Appeal No. 238/2019, decided
on 15 February, 2019 by Hon'ble the Supreme Court).
With these submissions, learned counsel for the petitioners
pray that the benefit of anticipatory bail may be granted to the
petitioners.
Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor and learned counsel
appearing on behalf of the complainant have opposed the bail
application and stated that plea of contaminated milk was taken
subsequently and it is after thought of the petitioners.
Learned Public Prosecutor also submits one factual report.
Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case,
upon a consideration of the arguments advanced by both the
sides, judgment cited by learned counsel for the petitioners and
(3 of 3) [CRLMB-12096/2019]
on perusal of the factual report, without expressing any opinion on
the merits/demerits of the case, this Court is of the opinion that it
is a fit case for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners under
Section 438 Cr.P.C.
Accordingly, the bail application is allowed and it is directed
that in the event of arrest of petitioners (1) Gaurav Parik S/o
Bhadresh Bhai Parik (2) Bhadresh Bhai Parik S/o
Ghanshyamlal in connection with F.I.R. No.306/2019 Police
Station Sanchore, District Jalore, the petitioners shall be
released on bail, provided each of them furnish a personal bond in
the sum of Rs.50,000/- along with two sureties of Rs.25,000/-
each to the satisfaction of the concerned Investigating
Officer/S.H.O. on the following conditions :-
(I) that the petitioners shall make themselves available for
interrogation by a police officer as and when required;
(ii) that the petitioners shall not directly or indirectly make any
inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with
the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing
such facts to the court or any police officer; and
(iii) that the petitioners shall not leave India without previous
permission of the court.
(DEVENDRA KACHHAWAHA),J
22-ashish/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
