Rameshbhai Chunaji Maknaji Mali vs State Of Gujarat

Nirzar S. Desai, J

Heard learned advocate Mr.Majmudar for the applicant, learned advocate Mr.Chintan Popat for the original complainant and learned Additional Public Prosecutor Mr.Raval for the respondent – State.

By this application filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, the applicant is seeking release on regular bail in connection with the FIR being C.R. No.11204025230049 of 2023 registered with Kheda Town Police Station, Kheda for offences punishable under Sections 465, 467, 468, 471 and 120(b) of the Indian Penal Code.

3.1 Learned advocate for the applicant submitted that, the applicant is not involved in commission of offence as alleged in the FIR and therefore, looking to the role of the applicant and nature of the allegations, the applicant is required to be enlarged on regular bail by imposing suitable terms and conditions.

3.2 Learned advocate Mr.Chintan Popat appearing for the original complainant has placed on record the affidavit of the original complainant viz. Rameshchandra Bhagwandas Akhani affirmed on 24.06.2023 wherein the original complainant has stated that conciliation between himself and the applicant accused is going on and dispute is likely to be settled between the parties and, therefore, he has no objection if the present applicant is enlarged on bail.

3.3 The aforesaid affidavit of the original complainant viz. Rameshchandra Bhagwandas Akhani who is present in the court and is identified by learned advocate Mr.Popat as original complainant is taken on record.

On the other hand, learned APP appearing for the respondent – State vehemently submits that, the offences which have been charged are serious in nature affecting the society at large and looking to the facts as well as the allegations made against the applicant, no discretion would be required to be exercised.

In the facts and circumstances of the case and considering the nature of allegations, this Court is of the opinion that, discretion is required to be exercised to enlarge the applicant on regular bail. This Court has considered the following facts while exercising discretion in favour of the applicant :-

(i) the applicant is in jail since 25.04.2023;

(ii) the investigation is over and the charge-sheet is filed;

(iii) without entering into the merits of the matter any further or perusing the matter as it is jointly submitted by learned advocate Mr.Majmudar for the applicant and learned advocate Mr.Popat for original complainant who is present before the Court and is identified by learned advocate Mr.Popat, who has stated that in view of ongoing conciliation proceedings going on between the original complainant and the applicant, since he does not have any objection if the present applicant is enlarged on bail, this Court has considered this application and the present applicant in light of the above is required to be enlarged on bail;

(iv) the original complainant, upon inquiring from the Court also has specifically stated before this Court that he does not have any objection if the present applicant is enlarged on bail and, therefore, considering the nature of dispute present applicant is enlarged on bail.

(v) no past antecedent is attributed to the present applicant.

In view of the aforesaid facts, without discussing the evidence in detail, this Court, prima facie, is of the opinion that, this is a fit case to exercise the discretion and enlarge the applicant on regular bail. Hence, present application is allowed and the applicant is ordered to be released on regular bail in connection with the FIR being C.R. No.11204025230049 of 2023 registered with Kheda Town Police Station, Kheda on executing personal bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten thousand only) with one surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court and subject to the conditions that he shall;

[a] not take undue advantage of liberty or misuse liberty;

[b] not act in a manner injuries to the interest of the prosecution;

[c] surrender passport, if any, to the lower court within a week;

[d] not leave India without prior permission of the Sessions Judge concerned;

[e] furnish latest address of residence to the Investigating Officer and also to the Court at the time of execution of the bond and shall not change the residence without prior permission of the trial Court;

[f] mark his presence before the concerned police station in the first week of every month till the trial is over;

The Authorities will release the applicant only if the applicant is not required in connection with any other offence for the time being. If breach of any of the above conditions is committed, the Sessions Judge concerned will be free to issue warrant or take appropriate action in the matter. Bail bond to be executed before the learned Lower Court having jurisdiction to try the case. It will be open for the concerned Court to delete, modify and/or relax any of the above conditions, in accordance with law. At the trial, learned Trial Court shall not be influenced by the observations of preliminary nature, qua the evidence at this stage, made by this Court while enlarging the applicant on bail.

Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent. Direct service is permitted.