Gujarat High CourtNareshbhai Chhaganbhai Patel ... vs State Of Gujarat on 30 March, 2017Author:P.P.BhattBench:P.P.BhattR/CR.MA/30055/2016                                                  ORDER




                  IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

         CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR REGULAR BAIL) NO. 30055
                                 of 2016

         =============================================
              NARESHBHAI CHHAGANBHAI PATEL (KACHHADIYA)....Applicant(s)
                                       Versus
                          STATE OF GUJARAT....Respondent(s)
         =============================================
         Appearance:
         MR BM MANGUKIYA, ADVOCATE for the Applicant(s) No. 1
         MS BELA A PRAJAPATI, ADVOCATE for the Applicant(s) No. 1
         MR DAIFRAZ HAVEWALLA, ADVOCATE for the Respondent(s) No. 1
         MS CHETNA M SHAH, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
         =============================================

          CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.P.BHATT

                                        Date : 30/03/2017

                                          ORAL ORDER1.      The present application is filed underSection 439of the

         Code of Criminal Procedure by the applicant for regular bail

         in    connection        with   an      FIR         being    C.R.No.          I-168/2016

         registered with           Kamrej Police Station, Surat, District:Surat for the offences punishable underSections 406,420,465,467,468,471,120and114of the Indian Penal Code.2.      Learned advocate for the applicant submits that the

         present applicant is innocent person, however, he has been

         falsely implicated in the alleged offence. It is submitted that in

         fact, dispute between complainant and applicant is of a Civil

         nature but, only with a view to cause harassment, it has beenPage 1 of 7HC-NIC                                       Page 1 of 10      Created On Mon Aug 14 03:20:11 IST 2017
                                                                                                         1 of 10
                 R/CR.MA/30055/2016                                            ORDER



         converted in to Criminal complaint. It is also submitted that the

         relevant documents have been collected by the concerned

         Investigating Officer and if, some documents are still required

         to be recovered, the applicant will co-operate to the concerned

         Investigating Officer to trace out such documents. Learned

         advocate, Mr. Mangukiya, submits that the offences alleged

         against the applicant are triable by the Learned Magistrate

         Court. It is further submitted that the applicant is a resident of

         Surat and is also having responsibility to look after his business

         and maintain his family. Therefore, there is no possibility of

         fleeing away and his presence can be secured at the time of

         trial by imposing appropriate conditions as may be deemed fit

         and proper by this Court.         It is further submitted that the

         investigation is over, charge sheet is filed, and therefore, now

         there is no possibility of tampering with the evidence and the

         applicant is ready and willing to abide by the conditions that

         may be imposed while releasing the applicant on regular bail.

         Learned advocate, Mr. B.M.Magukiya, further submits that the

         applicant will deposit Rs.5,00,000/- before the concerned Trial

         Court without prejudice to his rights and contentions, and the

         concerned Trial Court may be directed to keep said amount in

         Fixed deposit till the conclusion of Trial. It is therefore

         submitted that considering the nature of allegations, and thePage 2 of 7HC-NIC                               Page 2 of 10     Created On Mon Aug 14 03:20:11 IST 2017
                                                                                                2 of 10
                     R/CR.MA/30055/2016                                               ORDER



         role attributed to the applicant, he may be enlarged on regular

         bail by imposing suitable conditions.3.   Learned Additional Public Prosecutor, appearing for the

         State, opposed the application and submits that from the

         charge sheet papers, there appears to be a prima facie case

         against the applicant for committing the alleged offence, and

         therefore, looking to the gravity of the offence, he may not be

         enlarged on bail. However, learned Additional Public Prosecutor

         has not disputed the fact regarding grant of bail to the co-

         accused having similar allegations against him.4.   Learned Senior Counsel, Mr. Kavina, appearing for the

         original      complainant       has      also       adopted         the      arguments

         advanced by the Learned Additional Public Prosecutor, but, in

         addition to the said submissions, he submitted that the

         applicant is a habitual offender, and there are antecedents

         against the present applicant. It is also submitted that in an

         application filed by co-accused, Hiren A Solanki, who signed

         Satakhat as witness, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor

         submitted before the learned Sessions Court that Satakhat was

         executed between applicant-accused and the complainant by

         adopting fraudulent methods. It is further submitted by the

         Learned Senior Counsel, Mr. Kavina, that the present applicantPage 3 of 7HC-NIC                                    Page 3 of 10       Created On Mon Aug 14 03:20:11 IST 2017
                                                                                                       3 of 10
                 R/CR.MA/30055/2016                                                   ORDER



         with a view to grab the land worth Rs.10,50,00,000/- from the

         complainant, executed Satakhat showing cost of the land as

         Rs.50,00,000/- and the said document was not produced or

         given by the applicant to the concerned Investigating Officer

         till date, therefore, in the event of his release on bail,

         possibility of making use of the said Satakhat cannot be ruled

         out. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the

         present application, the applicant may not be enlarged on bail.5.   Regard       being     had      to     the     above         submissions            and

         considering the nature and gravity of accusation made against

         the applicant in the FIR and other charge sheet papers, in the

         facts and circumstances of the case, it appears that alleged

         offences    are     triable   by          the      Learned         Magistrate.           The

         investigation is over and chargesheet is submitted, there is no

         possibility of tempering evidence, and therefore, considering

         the fact that the applicant is a resident of Surat and also

         having responsibility to look after his business and maintain his

         family, his presence can be secured at the time of trial by

         imposing    appropriate       conditions,            moreover,            the      learned

         advocate for the applicant has also made a statement that

         without prejudice to the rights and contentions of the

         applicant, he is willing to deposit Rs.5,00,000/- before the

         concerned Trial Court within 4 weeks from the date of receiptPage 4 of 7HC-NIC                                     Page 4 of 10      Created On Mon Aug 14 03:20:11 IST 2017
                                                                                                       4 of 10
                    R/CR.MA/30055/2016                                                ORDER



         of the copy of the order, this Court is of the view that in the

         facts and circumstances of the case, discretion is required to

         be exercised to enlarge the applicant on regular bail. Hence,

         the present application is allowed and the applicant is ordered

         to be released on regular bail in connection with the offence

         being C.R.No. I- 168/2016 registered with                            Kamrej Police

         Station, Surat, District: Surat on executing a personal bond

         of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand Only) with one surety of

         the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court

         and subject to the conditions that the applicant shall;


             [a]       not take undue advantage of                        liberty or misuse
                       liberty;[b]       not act in a manner injurious to the interest of the
                       prosecution;[c]       surrender passport, if any, to the lower court within
                       a week;[d]       not      leave   the   State         of   Gujarat         without        prior
                       permission of the Sessions Judge concerned;
             [e]       mark presence before the concerned Police Station
                       on every Monday of each English calendar month
                       for a period of three months and thereafter,
                       alternate Monday for a period of six months,
                       between 11:00 a.m. and 2:00 p.m.;[f]       furnish latest and permanent address of 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 ofPage 5 of 7HC-NIC                                    Page 5 of 10       Created On Mon Aug 14 03:20:11 IST 2017
                                                                                                       5 of 10
                     R/CR.MA/30055/2016                                             ORDER



                        this Court;[g]       shall not enter into Surat and Navsari District for the
                        period of 6 months; except for the purpose of
                        marking presence and attending Court;[h]       shall deposit Rs.5,00,000/- as per the statement,
                        before the concerned Trial Court within period of 5
                        weeks from the date of his actual release and the
                        same may be deposited in a fixed deposit initially,
                        for a period of three years or till the trial is
                        concluded, whichever is earlier. If the trial is not
                        concluded within aforesaid period, the fixed deposit
                        may be renewed for further period till the trial over;
              [i]       the applicant shall co-operate to the concerned
                        Investigating Officer to trace out original Satakhat
                        (Banakhat)       executed          between             himself          and
                        Complainant;6.    The Authorities will release the applicant only if he is not

         required in connection with any other offence for the time

         being. If breach of any of the above conditions is committed,

         the Sessions Judge concerned will be free to issue warrant or

         take appropriate action in the matter. Bail bond to be executed

         before the learned Lower Court having jurisdiction to try the

         case. It will be open for the concerned Court to delete, modify

         and/or relax any of the above conditions, in accordance with

         law. At the trial, learned Trial Court shall not be influenced by

         the observations of preliminary nature, qua the evidence atPage 6 of 7HC-NIC                                    Page 6 of 10     Created On Mon Aug 14 03:20:11 IST 2017
                                                                                                     6 of 10
                   R/CR.MA/30055/2016                                            ORDER



         this stage, made by this Court while enlarging the applicant on

         bail.Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent.                          Direct

         service is permitted.(P.P.BHATT, J.)


         NEHAPage 7 of 7HC-NIC                                 Page 7 of 10     Created On Mon Aug 14 03:20:11 IST 2017
                                                                                                  7 of 10
                   R/CR.MA/30055/2016                                                    ORDERIN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

         CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR REGULAR BAIL) NO. 30055 of 2016

               [On note for speaking to minutes of order dated 30/03/2017 in
                                        R/CR.MA/30055/2016 ]

         ==========================================================
              NARESHBHAI CHHAGANBHAI PATEL (KACHHADIYA)....Applicant(s)
                                     Versus
                         STATE OF GUJARAT....Respondent(s)
         ==========================================================
         Appearance:MR SHREY DAVE, ADVOCATE FOR MR BM MANGUKIYA, ADVOCATE forthe Applicant(s) No. 1MS BELA A PRAJAPATI, ADVOCATE for the Applicant(s) No. 1
         MR DAIFRAZ HAVEWALLA, ADVOCATE for the Respondent(s) No. 1MS CHETNA SHAH, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1==========================================================

          CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.P.BHATT

                                          Date : 13/04/2017


                  ORAL ORDER ON NOTE FOR SPEAKING TO MINUTES1.    Heard learned advocate appearing for the original
         complainant,           learned        advocate           appearing                 for      the
         applicant,          and        the        learned            Additional                Public
         Prosecutor appearing for the respondent-State.2.    Upon       hearing        the         learned           advocate            for       the
         original complainant, the discrepancies pointed out in
         the    Note      for      Speaking          to        Minutes        deserve           to        be
         corrected.        It     is,    therefore,             directed           that       in     the
         order     dated        30.03.2017            passed          in      Criminal            Misc.Application (For Regular Bail) No.30055 of 2016, thePage 1 of 3HC-NIC                                        Page 8 of 10      Created On Mon Aug 14 03:20:11 IST 2017
                                                                                                          8 of 10
                R/CR.MA/30055/2016                                                   ORDER




         submission of learned senior counsel Mr. Kavina noted
         from 11th line of Paragraph No.4 beginning with the
         sentence,

              "It is further submitted by the Learned Senior
              Counsel, Mr. Kavina, that the present applicant
              with   a   view    to   grab    the    land    worth
              Rs.10,50,00,000/- from the complainant, executed
              Satakhat   showing    cost   of    the    land    as
              Rs.50,00,000/- and the said document was not
              produced or given by the applicant to the
              concerned   Investigating   Officer    till    date,
              therefore, in the event of his release on bail,
              possibility of making use of the said Satakhat
              cannot be ruled out."shall stand replaced with,

              "It is further submitted by the Learned Senior
              Counsel, Mr. Kavina, that the present applicant
              with a view to grab the land of the complainant
              executed another Satakhat with a co-accused
              Hirenbhai Arvindbhai Solanki on 22.03.2016 for
              Rs.10,50,00,000/-, and the said document was not
              produced or given by the applicant to the
              concerned   Investigating  Officer   till  date,
              therefore, in the event of his release on bail,
              possibility of making use of the said Satakhat
              cannot be ruled out."3.   Similarly,            in    paragraph         No.5,         i.e.        condition
         No.5(i),    the      last        word      "complainant"               shall         stand
         replaced     with          the     words           "co-accused               Hirenbhai
         Arvindbhai Solanki on 22.03.2016".4.   Fresh order/writ be issued accordingly.The Note for Speaking to Minutes stands disposed
         of accordingly. Direct service is permitted.Page 2 of 3HC-NIC                                     Page 9 of 10     Created On Mon Aug 14 03:20:11 IST 2017
                                                                                                      9 of 10
                       R/CR.MA/30055/2016                                            ORDER




                                                                                (P.P.BHATT, J.)
         BD SongaraPage 3 of 3HC-NIC                                     Page 10 of 10    Created On Mon Aug 14 03:20:11 IST 2017
                                                                                                  10 of 10