Dilipkumar Kantilal Thakkar vs State Of Gujarat

A.S. Supehia, J

By way of the present application filed under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, the applicantsÂaccused have prayed for bail in

connection with the FIR being C.R. No.11191022210914 of 2021 registered with Isanpur Police Station, Ahmedabad City, Dist.Ahmedabad for the

offences punishable under Sections 406, 465, 467, 471, and 114 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC).

The case of the prosecution is that the applicants are running their business in partnership in the name and style of Shree Hari Om Developers. The

said firm constructed a building on the land bearing Block/Survey No.278B admeasuring 0Â04Â05 gunthas. Shree Hari Om building is situated in the

sim of village Ghodasar, Maninagar, Ahmedabad. The said land had been covered under Town Planning Scheme No.52 and the same has been given

Final Plot No.23. The said building is situated in Nav Nirman Agam Nigam CoÂoperative Housing Society Limited registered under the provision of

the Gujarat Cooperative Societies Act, 1961. The applicants got the land converted for nonÂagricultural purpose on payment of necessary fees and

they have also submitted plan to the Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation (AMC) and thereafter, the flats have been constructed. Thereafter, the first

informant and his family members had visited the site and decided to purchase 03 flats in the scheme. It is alleged that the first informant wanted to

utilize 02 flats for running a hospital, which is a commercial purpose. It is alleged that the applicants had to support the first informant in getting the

permission. In the registered sale deed, it is clearly mentioned that the flats can be used only for residential purpose. It is the case of the first informant

that he had paid necessary taxes for commercial purpose and obtained other necessary permissions under Shops and Commercial Establishments Act.

When the applicants started constructing shops at the ground floor, where extra land was available, the first informant informed the AMC about the

construction of shops and, therefore, the AMC authority made the applicants to stop the construction and the construction was also razed by the

authorities without informing the applicants. Thereafter, the AMC authority found that the residential premises of the first informant have been utilized

for commercial purposes and, therefore, they sealed the same. Further, the first informant wanted to return the flats to the applicants as, according to

him, he wanted to run the hospital in the said residential property and as the applicants did not accept the said proposal of the first informant, the

present F.I.R. has been lodged against the applicants and another.

Learned advocate for the applicants has submitted that the application to the Isanpur Police Station has been filed in the year 2019, pursuant to

which the applicants and other persons shown as members in the building, have been called by the police, their statements were recorded and no

objection affidavit as also filed by other members also and all of them deposed before the police that the affidavit submitted by the applicants to the

AMC is genuine and it bears signature also, except the first informant and his wife. It is submitted that after the hospital of the first informant was

sealed, he registered the F.I.R. after so long to extract money from the applicants. So far as the affidavit filed by the first informant addressing the

AMC is concerned, the learned advocate for the applicants has submitted that the same cannot be considered as valuable security or testamentary

evidence and the same does not attract the provision of Section 467 of the IPC. He has submitted that the entire case is based on documentary

evidence hence, custodial interrogation of the applicants may not be necessary.

Under the circumstances and in light of the aforenoted facts, issue RULE returnable on 04.08.2021. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor waives

service of notice of rule on behalf of the respondent â€" State through video conferencing. Till then the applicants shall not be arrested.

It is clarified that the applicants shall remain present on 19.07.2021 between 11 a.m. to 05 p.m. before the Investigating Officer and shall fully coÂ‐

operate with the investigation. Appropriate report shall be filed by the Investigating Officer before the next date of hearing.