1. RULE.
Ms CM Shah, learned APP appears and waives service of notice of rule on behalf of the respondent State.
2. The petitioner has preferred this application under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 seeking regular bail in connection with Kapadvanj Police Station bearing CR No. I 75 of 2010 pertaining to the offence punishable under Sections 420, 406, 465, 467, 468, 471 read with Section 114 of the IPC.
3. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the matter is taken up for final hearing today.
4. Mr DM Devnani, learned advocate representing the petitioner submitted that a bare perusal of the FIR would suggest that no major role was played by the petitioner in the offence. That the role attributed to the petitioner was that he identified the signatory of the sale deed. That considering the FIR, the main allegation levelled by the complainant Mohanbhai Jivrajbhai is against his own brother co-accused Fakirbhai Jivrajbhai. That according to the prosecution case, main accused Fakirbhai Jivrajbhai affixed his own photograph in the document and signed in the name of his brother complainant Mohanbhai Jivrajbhai. It is submitted that the sale deed was made in favour of co-accused Madhuben and it is submitted that Madhuben was released on anticipatory bail in connection with this incident and the learned advocate Mr DM Devnani, upon instructions, submitted that the sale transaction was subsequently not effected upon and the property is now in the possession of the complainant.
5. Per contra, Ms CM Shah, learned APP representing the State opposed this application and submitted that considering the FIR as well as the order passed by the Sessions Court rejecting the regular bail application of the petitioner, it clearly reveals that the petitioner is involved in the serious offence and therefore, the application may be rejected.
6. Having considered the submissions advanced on behalf of both the sides and considering the FIR as well as the order passed by the Sessions Court rejecting the bail application of the petitioner and considering the role attributed to the petitioner in connection with this offence, this Court is of the opinion that the discretionary powers vested in this Court under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 deserves to be exercised in favour of the petitioner.
7. Considering the submissions made on behalf of the parties and having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, the application is allowed and the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail in connection with Crime Register No. I 75 of 2010 registered at Kapadvanj Police Station for the offence alleged against him in this application on his executing bond of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees five thousand only) with one solvent surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the lower Court and subject to the conditions that he shall,
(a) not take undue advantage of his liberty or abuse his liberty.
(b) not try to tamper or pressurize the prosecution witnesses or complainant in any manner.
(c) maintain law and order and should co-operate the investigating officers;
(d) not act in any manner injurious to the interest of the prosecution.
(e) not leave the local limits of State of Gujarat without the prior permission of the concerned Trial Court;
(f) furnish the address of his 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 Court.
(g) surrender his passport, if any, to the lower Court, within a week.
8. If breach of any of the above conditions is committed, the concerned Trial Court 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.
[J.C.UPADHYAYA, J.] mrpandya Top