[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.I-34 of 2012 registered with J.P.Road Police Station, Vadodara for the offence under Sections 406, 420 and 506(1) of the Indian Penal Code.
[2] Applicant is serving in G.E.B. Heard learned advocate for the applicant at length. Learned advocate for the applicant took this Court to the complaint as well as relevant documents. It is admitted fact that complaint is lodged on 15.03.2012 for the alleged cheque dated 18.05.2011. It is also narrated in the complaint that in reference to the application submitted by the complainant 10.09.2011 which was being numbered as 45/74/11 addressed to J.P.Road Police Station, another cheque for the said transaction was issued by the present applicant dated 09.04.2012 for an amount of Rs.19 lacs. From the earlier cheque dated 18.05.2011 to 15.03.2012, no complaint was lodged and subsequently, when applicant accused issued cheque dated 09.04.2012, complainant did not wait and lodged complaint on 15.03.2012. Considering the allegations made in the complaint and role attributed to the applicant, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the 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.I-34 of 2012 registered with J.P.Road Police Station, Vadodara for the offence alleged against him, the 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 14th 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 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.
[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