Maheshbhai Hariyabhai Rathava vs State Of Gujarat

[1] Heard the learned advocates for the respective parties by video conferencing.

[2] RULE. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor waives service of notice of rule for and on behalf of respondent - State.

[3] By way of the present application under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, the applicant-accused has prayed for bail in connection with the FIR being C.R.No.III-352 of 2019 registered with Amod Police Station, District Bharuch for the offences under Sections 65(a) and 65(e) of the Gujarat Prohibition Act, 1949.

[4] Learned advocate for the applicant submits that the nature of allegations are such for which custodial interrogation of the applicant at this stage is not necessary. He further submits that the applicant will keep himself available during the course of investigation, as well as trial also and will not flee from justice. He further submits that the applicant is not named in the FIR and there are not antecedents against the present applicant.

[5] Learned advocate for the applicant, on instructions, states that the applicant is ready and willing to abide by all the conditions, including Page 1 of 4 Downloaded on : Fri Aug 28 02:18:17 IST 2020 R/CR.MA/11066/2020 ORDER imposition of conditions with regard to powers of investigating agency to file an application before the competent Court for his remand. He further submits that upon filing of such application by the investigating agency, the right of the applicant accused to oppose such application on merits may be kept open. Learned advocate, therefore, submits that considering the above facts, the applicant may be granted bail.

[6] On the other hand, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the respondent- State has opposed grant of bail looking to the nature and gravity of the offence.

[7] Having heard the learned advocates for the parties and perusing the material placed on record and taking into consideration the facts of the case, nature of allegations, gravity of offences, role attributed to the accused, without discussing the evidence in detail, at this stage, I am inclined to grant bail to the applicant.

[8] This Court has considered following aspects;

applicant has been prima facie implicated as an accused on the basis of the statement of the co-accused.

Looking to the over all facts and circumstances of the present case, I am inclined to consider the case of the applicant.

[9] This Court has also taken into consideration the law laid down by the Apex Court in the case of Sushila Aggarwal vs. State (Nct of Delhi), AIR 2020 SC

831. Page 2 of 4 Downloaded on : Fri Aug 28 02:18:17 IST 2020

R/CR.MA/11066/2020 ORDER [10] In the result, the present application is allowed. The applicant is ordered to be released on bail in the event of his arrest in connection with FIR being C.R.No.III-352 of 2019 registered with Amod Police Station, District Bharuch on his executing a personal bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand Only) with one surety of like amount on the following conditions that he :

(a) shall cooperate with the investigation and make himself available for interrogation whenever required;

(b) shall remain present at the concerned Police Station on 03.09.2020 between 11.00 a.m. 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 his 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 remand if he considers it proper and just and the learned Magistrate would decide it on merits;

R/CR.MA/11066/2020 ORDER [11] Despite this order, it would be open for the investigating agency to

apply to the competent Magistrate, for police remand of the applicant. The applicant shall remain present before the concerned Magistrate on the first date of hearing of such application and on all subsequent occasions, as may be directed by the concerned Magistrate. This would be sufficient to treat the accused in the judicial custody for the purpose of entertaining the 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 concerned 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 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] The application is allowed in the aforesaid terms. Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent. Registry is directed to intimate the concerned jail authority and the concerned Sessions Court about the present order by sending a copy of this order through Fax message, email and/or any other suitable electronic mode.

[14] Learned advocate for the applicant is also permitted to send a copy of this order to the concerned jail authority and the concerned Sessions Court through Fax message, email and/or any other suitable electronic mode.

Sd/- . (A. S. SUPEHIA, J) NEHA GUPTA///ABHISHEK Page 4 of 4 Downloaded on : Fri Aug 28 02:18:17 IST 2020