Pinalben D/O Govindbhai Rohit W/O Rajnikant Jethabhai Rohit vs State Of Gujarat

Ilesh J. Vora, J

By way of the present application under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, the applicants-accused have prayed for anticipatory bail in connection with the FIR being C.R. No.11187008210080 of 2021 registered with Virpur Police Station, District: Mahisagar for the offences under Sections 406, 420, 447, 504, 506(2) and 114 of IPC and Sections 3, 4(1), 4(3) and 5(c) of Gujarat Land Grabbing Act.

Learned advocate for the applicants submits that the applicants are innocent and they have been falsely implicated in the alleged offence. They have no past antecedents of like nature and custodial interrogation of the applicants is not essential for the purpose of investigation.

Learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the respondent — State has opposed grant of anticipatory bail stating inter alia that the allegations against the applicants are grave and serious in nature and custodial interrogation is necessary for further investigation of the case.

Having heard the learned advocates for the respective parties and perusing the material placed on record and taking into consideration the facts of the case, it appears that prior to this FIR, the complainant himself had submitted an application to the police authority, inter alia, stating that the land in question has been mortgaged by him for total amount of Rs.12,500/- and now, he is ready and willing to give the aforesaid amount to the present applicants, but somehow, they are not vacating the land by accepting the amount. In this background facts, prima-facie, it appears that the case does not fall under the provisions of Land Grabbing Act. The applicants are not having any past antecedent of like nature and they have cooperated with the investigation. There is no possibility of their fleeing from justice and therefore, their custodial interrogation is not required.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the role attributed to the present applicants in the alleged offence, I find no reason to decline pre-arrest bail to the applicants. In the result, the present application is allowed. The applicants are ordered to be released on bail in the event of their arrest in connection with a FIR being C.R. No.11187008210080 of 2021 registered with Virpur Police Station, District: Mahisagar on their executing a personal bond of Rs.10,000/-(Rupees Ten Thousand Only) each with one surety of like amount on the following conditions:

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

(b) shall remain present at concerned Police Station on 25.01.2022 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 their residence till the final disposal of the case till further orders;

(f) shall not leave India without the permission of the Trial Court and if having passport shall deposit the same before the 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;

Despite this order, it would be open for the Investigating Agency to apply to the competent Magistrate, for police remand of the applicants. The applicants 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 accordance with law. It is clarified that the applicants, 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.

At the trial, the 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.