[1] This application is filed by the applicant under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure apprehending his arrest in connection with C.R.No.Prohibition-I-39 of 2003 registered with Dhanpur Police Station, District - Dahod for the offence under Sections 66(b), 65(a)(e), 116(B) and 81 of the Bombay Prohibition Act.
[2] Heard learned advocates for the parties. This Court has gone through the allegations made in the complaint. It is alleged that present applicant accused supplied liquor to other co-accused persons. It is submitted by Mr.Trivedi, learned advocate for the applicant accused that for selling liquor, license was issued in favour of the applicants accused upto 2005 and thereafter, applicant accused was not having license. Alleged offence took place in the year 2003. Considering this facts and considering the role attributed to the applicant accused, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to applicant. 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.
[3] The application is allowed. In the event of arrest of the applicant in connection with C.R.No.Prohibition-I-39 of 2003 registered with Dhanpur Police Station, District - Dahod for the offence alleged against him, applicant shall be released on bail on executing a bond of Rs.10,000/- [Rupees ten thousand only] with one surety of the like amount on the following conditions that he shall:
co-operate with the investigation and make himself available whenever required;
remain present before the concerned Police Station on 17th May, 2012 between 11.00 a.m. and 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, shall furnish address to the Investigating Officer and the Court concerned and shall not change the 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;
[4] 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 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.
[5] At the trial, the Trial Court shall not be influenced by the observations made by this Court while enlarging the applicant on bail.
[6] Rule made absolute to the aforesaid extent. Direct service is permitted.
[M.D.Shah, J.] satish Top