AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
N.V.Anjaria, J
Heard learned advocate Mr.Jaivik Bhatt for the applicant and learned Additional Public Prosecutor Mr.Manan Mehta for the respondent â€" State.
The present is an application successively filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 seeking regular bail, which is in
connection with the First Information Report being Crime Register No.I-11993004200168 of 2020 registered on 01st April, 2020 with Bhachau, Kutch
Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections 381 and 114 of the Indian Penal Code. After lodgment of the F.I.R., the applicant had filed
Criminal Miscellaneous Application No.6159 of 2020 for regular bail, which was withdrawn as per order dated 23rd April, 2020 and the Court
permitted withdrawal of the said application at that stage.
The F.I.R. was lodged by a Security Supervisor of Gujarat Energy Transmission Corporation in which it was inter alia stated that when the said
Supervisor-complainant Chanubha Sodha visited along with one Ramabhai the place of GETCO, he found that out of 100 drums containing wire
admeasuring the length of 2 km each, four drums were missing. The present applicant was not named in the F.I.R. but came to be arrested on 01st
April, 2020.
3.1 Subsequent to the F.I.R., investigation was carried out and now chargesheet has been filed on 01st June, 2020. The present application is moved
again pursuant to filing of the chargesheet.
It could be submitted by learned advocate for the applicant that the investigation is over and that the role which was noticed of the present applicant
is that main accused named Mahadevbhai approached to find out a buyer for the stolen goods. It was submitted that the case of the prosecution has
been that the applicant in turn asked one Sajjanbhai to find out a buyer for the goods and that whereby he attempted to earn money. Learned advocate
submitted that it was not possible to readily judge that the applicant himself was involved in the act of theft.
4.1 On the other hand, learned Additional Public Prosecutor referred to the statement of witness one Zulfikar Mukhtar Ansari who happened to be the
driver at the company and gave statement and tried to suggest involvement of the applicant. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor opposed granting of
bail.
It is true that the aforesaid statement is part of the investigation, however the ultimate effect and determination of the exact role of the applicant
would be based on the totality of the evidence and it would not be possible to readily implicate the applicant on the basis of the said statement only in
absence of further evidence which may be led in course of the trial. The stage is that where investigation is over and the chargesheet is also filed. The
offence is under Section 381 of the Indian Penal Code triable by Magistrate.
5.1 In the totality of the circumstances, granting liberty to the applicant has to be accorded primacy over keeping him in jail during the trial. The Court
is inclined to grant regular bail to the applicant.
5.2 Therefore, it is directed that the applicant shall be released on regular bail on condition of his executing a bond of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty
Five Thousand Only) and further furnishing security of the equal amount.
It is however clarified that granting of regular bail by this order does not amount to expression on merits of the case of the either side nor it reflect
anything on the statement relied on by learned Additional Public Prosecutor.
6.1 The regular bail granted to the applicant by this Court shall be further governed and regulated by the following conditions,
(a) The applicant shall not take undue advantage of liberty or misuse liberty;
(b) The applicant shall not act in a manner injurious to the interest of the prosecution;
(c) The applicant shall surrender passport, if he is holding, to the lower court within a week;
(d) The applicant shall not leave the State of Gujarat without prior permission of the court concerned;
(e) The applicant shall furnish the present address of his residence to the I.O. and also to the Court at the time of execution of the bond and shall not
change the residence without prior permission of this Court.
The Authorities will release the applicant only if he is not required in connection with any other offence for the time being.
If breach of any of the above conditions is committed, the Trial Judge concerned will be free to issue warrant or take appropriate action in the
matter. Bail bond shall be executed before the lower court having jurisdiction to try the case.
8.1 It is clarified that the Trial Court shall not be influenced by any of the observations made in this order which are only for the purpose of
considering prayer for bail and they are of preliminary in nature.
Application is allowed as above. Rule is made absolute accordingly.
Registry is directed to intimate about the passing of this order to the police station concerned immediately through e-mode. Learned advocate for the
applicant is also permitted to effect the service of this order through e-mode.