Manishaben Navalsinh Vaghela vs State Of Gujarat

Umesh A. Trivedi, J

[1] This application is filed praying for an order of anticipatory bail in connection with an offence registered being C.R.No.11192061220313 of 2022 with Viramgam Town Police Station, Ahmedabad Rural for the offence punishable under Sections 326, 504, 506(2) and 114 of the Indian Penal Code as also under Section 135 of the Gujarat Police Act.

[2] Though initially this application came to be filed by Manishaben Navalsinh Vaghela and Zala Parasba @ Pinkyben Nanjibhai, learned advocate withdrew the said application so far as it relates to applicant No.1 - Manishaben Navalsinh Vaghela and this application came to be disposed of qua her. Hence, this application is pressed for applicant No.2 - Zala Parasba @ Pinkyben Nanjibhai.

[3] Mr. Vicky Mehta, learned advocate for the applicant submitted that Zala Parasba @ Pinkyben Nanjibhai – applicant No.2 is sought to be involved as she is sister of co-accused, Manishaben Vaghela, who had gone to the first informant, who is an advocate by Profession. Therefore, the Office bearers of the Bar Association and other advocate persuaded Manishaben Vaghela not to behaving in such manner with the advocate. The applicant along with Manishaben Vaghela and her cousin and one unknown person accompanied them started abusing and assaulted the first informant with kick and fist blows, whereas Manishaben Vaghela is said to have assaulted the first informant with wooden log and caused injury over her face causing extraction of a tooth.

[3.1] He has further submitted that so far as applicant is concerned, except giving kick and fist blows as alleged in the FIR, there is no role assigned to her. It is only because she accompanied Manishaben being her sister for some work, she has been roped into the offence. It is further submitted that it may be that for safeguarding interest of Manishaben, applicant might have given any kick and fist blows to anyone as claimed while they both were being manhandled by the advocate gathered there but in any case, according to submission of learned advocate for the applicant, she might be wrongly dragged into the offence, which is essentially committed by co-accused – Manishaben. Therefore, he has submitted that the applicant No.2 may be enlarged on bail.

[4] As against that, Ms. Shruti Pathak, learned APP submitted that the applicant is named in the FIR and part played by her is also narrated in the complaint. Since she has given kick and fist blows to the first informant and witnesses, she may not be granted an order of anticipatory bail.

[5] Having heard the learned advocate for the applicant as also the learned APP and going through the FIR and the order impugned, it emerges that though offence is registered under Section 326 of IPC, essentially there is no allegation against the applicant having used any weapon for commission of an offence, that too, under Section 326 of IPC. Since the first informant and other witnesses are known to law, assigning of role to all the persons involved in the case, may not be incorrect, might be exaggerated.

[6] Considering the same, since the applicant is a lady accused as well as nothing to do with the cause pleaded in the FIR and nothing is required to be recovered and discovered from her, custodial interrogation of the present applicant is not required at all and therefore, I deem it fit to allow this application.

[7] 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, reported at (1980) 2 SCC 565.

[8] In the result, the present application is allowed. The applicant is ordered to be released on bail in the event of her arrest in connection with a FIR being C.R.No.11192061220313 of 2022 with Viramgam Town Police Station, Ahmedabad Rural on her executing a personal bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand Only) with one surety of like amount on the following conditions that she:

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

(b) shall remain present at concerned Police Station on 23.03.2023 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;

[9] 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 learned Magistrate on the first date of hearing of such application and on all subsequent occasions, as may be directed by the learned Magistrate. This would be sufficient to treat the accused in the judicial custody for the purpose of entertaining 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 learned Magistrate to consider such a request in R/CR.MA/2469/2023 ORDER DATED: 15/03/2023 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 anticipatory bail order.

[10.] At the trial, the concerned trial court shall not be influenced by the prima facie observations made by this Court in the present order. Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent. Direct service is permitted.