[1] This application is filed by the applicants under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in connection with C.R.No.I-212 of 2011 registered with Gandhidham "A" Division Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections 406, 420, 467, 468, 471 of the Indian Penal Code.
[2] It is submitted by the learned advocate for the applicants that one Shri Shanker Advani lodged complaint before learned JMFC, Gandhidham and the Court has passed order to hold inquiry under section 202 of the Cr.P.C. and called for police report and on the basis of the order passed by the Court, police officer has submitted report before the learned Trial Court and it is numbered as Inquiry Case No.42 of 2011 and the matter is pending before the Trial Court for further proceedings. For the said alleged act, Mamlatdar, Gandhidham lodged another complaint on 24.11.2011.
[3] Heard learned advocates for the parties. Prima facie it is found that for one alleged act, two complaints are lodged one before learned JMFC and another before police. Considering the facts of the case, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the applicants. This Court has also taken into consideration the law laid down by the Apex Court in the case of Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre v. State of Maharashtra & Ors. Reported in [2011]1 SCC 694, wherein the Apex Court reiterated the law laid down by the Constitutional Bench in the case of Shri Gurubaksh Singh Sibbia & Ors. Reported in [1980]2 SCC 565.
[4] In the event of arrest of the applicants in connection with C.R.No.I-212 of 2011 registered with Gandhidham "A" Division Police Station for the offences alleged against them, the applicants shall be released on bail on each executing a bond of Rs.10,000/- [Rupees ten thousand only] with one surety of the like amount on the following conditions that they shall:
co-operate with the investigation and make themselves available whenever required;
remain present before the concerned Police Police Station on 17th January, 2012 between 11.00 a.m. to 2.00 p.m..;
not hamper the investigation in any manner nor shall directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any witness so as to dissuade them for disclosing such facts to the Court or to any Police Officer;
at the time of execution of bond, they shall furnish their address to the Investigating Officer and the Court concerned and shall not change their residence till the final disposal of the case or till further orders;
not leave India without the permission of the Court and, if holding Passport, surrender the same before the trial Court immediately;
[5] It would be open to the Investigating Officer to file an application for remand if he considers it proper and just; and the competent Court would decide it on merits.
[6] At the trial, the Trial Court shall not be influenced by the observations made by this Court while enlarging the applicants on bail. It is clarified that so far as Inquiry Case No.42 of 2011 is concerned, learned JMFC is at liberty to take decision in accordance with law without being influenced by the order passed by this Court today in this application.
[7] Rule made absolute to the aforesaid extent. Direct service is permitted.
[M.D.Shah, J.] satish Top