DHANSINGBHAI HAMERIYABHAI RATHVA Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Court on 29.05.2020 passed the following order:-

(2.) Today, the Court also had an occasion to hear Mr. Kapadia, learned advocate for the applicant and Ms.Mehta, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the respondent. Further,Mr. Ninama, officer in-charge of the police station, has joined through video conferencing. It is, on instructions, submitted by learned Additional Public Prosecutor that the lady, who is allegedly involved in selling the country liquor, namely, Rinkyben, is not an official wife, but present applicant is in a living relationship with her and that is how for her cause, he used to visit the police station. She has further submitted on instructions, from the police officer concerned that the village is not so big and Dhansinghbhai, who is relationship with Rinkyben, is known to the police officers as Rinkyben's residence is behind the police station.

(3.) Mr. Kapadia, learned advocate for the applicant, on instructions, has a strong objection to this stating that a new story is being developed by the police authority because Rinkyben is not the wife, as could be clearly made out from the instructions that he received from Dhansinghbhai. He also further submits that in a population of about 15,000, it is unlikely for the police officers to know this person and the entire First Information Report is concocted against this person. Moreover, the liquor has already been found by the police officer and custodial interrogation will not be necessary. Therefore also, the anticipatory bail be granted in his favour. The Court can always impose strictest conditions, which would include asking for custodial interrogation by the police officer, if in case, the IO genuinely requires the same.