1. The present application has been filed by the applicants for grant of regular bail under Section 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.
2. The applicants accused are charged with having committed offence under Sections 406, 420, 465, 467, 468, 471, 506(2), 120B read with Section 114 of IPC for which FIR being C.R.No. I-26 of 2010 registered with DCB Police Station, Surat.
3. Learned Advocate Mr. Dave for the applicant referred to the papers and submitted that the allegations are with regard to an attempt to deal with the property on the basis of alleged forged will dated 26.12.1976. However, he submitted that there are two wills dated 24.09.1976 and 26.12.1976 and the original owner had no issue and therefore property was sought to be bequeathed leading to filing of the complaint for the alleged offence. However, he submitted that as the case is based on documentary evidence and the alleged forged will dated 26.12.1976 is also recovered and the custodial interrogation is over and the applicants being female, present application may be allowed.
4. Learned APP Ms. M.L.Shah resisted the application. Though she submitted that it is a case of attempt to deal with the property with such document. However, she submitted that the custodial interrogation is over.
5. Learned Advocate Mr. U.M. Panchal appearing for the original complainant referred to the affidavit of the complainant and submitted that there is a prima facie case suggesting the involvement. He emphasized the manner in which the property was sought to be grabbed on the basis of forged document. He submitted that the complainant is the owner for which the entries are also mutated and it is also confirmed by the revenue authority for which he referred to the communication dated 21.12.2009 produced with the affidavit. He, therefore, submitted that as there is a prima facie case suggesting the involvement, present application may not be allowed.
6. In view of rival submissions, it is required to be considered whether the present application can be entertained or not. It is well accepted that the Court is not required to appreciate or scrutinize the evidence in detail at this stage. However, for considering the prima facie case the relevant aspects like, nature of offence, manner in which the offence is alleged to have been committed and role attributed are required to be considered. In the facts of the present case, having regard to the rival submissions as well as the papers and considering the nature of offence, role attributed and also considering the fact that it was a case for an attempt to deal with the property and also considering the fact that the custodial interrogation is over, the document is also recovered and the applicants are female, the present application deserves to be allowed considering the guidelines for grant of bail subject to the conditions hereinafter.
7. Accordingly, present application stands allowed. The applicants are ordered to be released on regular bail in connection with the F.I.R. being C.R.No. I-26 of 2010 registered with DCB Police Station, Surat, on their executing a bond of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand) each with one solvent surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the lower Court and subject to the conditions that they shall:
(a) not take undue advantage of their liberty or abuse their liberty.
(b) not to try to tamper or pressurize the prosecution witnesses or complainant in any manner.
(c) not act in any manner injurious to the interest of the prosecution.
(d) maintain law and order and should cooperate with the investigating officers.
(f) furnish the address of their residence to the Investigating Officer and also to the Court at the time of execution of the bond and shall not change their residence without prior permission of the Court.
(g) surrender their passport, if any, to the lower Court, within a week.
8. If breach of any of the above conditions is committed, the concerned Sessions Judge will be free to issue warrant or take appropriate action in the matter.
9. Bail before the lower Court having jurisdiction to try the case. It would be open to the trial Court concerned to give time to furnish the solvency certificate if prayed for.
10. Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent. Direct service is permitted.
(RAJESH H.SHUKLA, J.) jani Top