GHANCHI SARFARAZ MOHMADBHAI Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Learned APP has supplied the report. The same is ordered to be taken on record.

(2.) Learned advocate Mr.Zubin Bharda appearing for the applicant has submitted that the applicant was released on anticipatory bail vide order dated 15.02.2019 passed in Criminal Misc. Application No.231 of 2019 for the aforenoted offence and he was asked to remain present on 01.03.2019 before the Investigating Officer as per the condition no.1 incorporated in the order, however, the applicant did not remain present. It is submitted that subsequently the applicant, who was arraigned as an accused in the FIR being C.R. No.I-178 of 2018 registered with Kadi Police Station, District Mehsana for the offence punishable under Sections 395, 397, 143, 147, 148, 149, 452, 427, 324, 323, 405 and 506(2) of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short "the IPC") and under Section 135 of the Gujarat Police Act, the applicant was released on regular bail by this Court vide order dated 21.05.2020 passed in Criminal Misc. Application No.6976 of 2020. He has submitted that after the applicant was released on bail, an application for cancellation of bail was filed on the ground of non compliance of the condition no.1, which was envisaged in the aforesaid order dated 15.02.2019 releasing the applicant on anticipatory bail. He has submitted that the applicant was in jail. He has submitted that the applicant could not comply with the order dated 15.02.2019, the trial court vide judgment and order dated 17.02.2021 passed in Criminal Misc. Application No.48 of 2020 cancelled the order dated 15.02.2019 granting anticipatory bail to the present applicant. He has submitted that the applicant is ready and willing to comply with all the conditions as would be directed by this Court. It is submitted that since the present applicant was released on anticipatory bail for the aforesaid offence, the present application may be allowed as now he will not be committing any default in complying with the conditions.

(3.) Vehemently opposing the aforesaid submission, learned APP has submitted that the applicant is a habitual offender. He has submitted that the applicant has committed two offences after this offence and one before the offence for which he was granted anticipatory bail. He has submitted that the order of the trial court granting him anticipatory bail was passed on 15.02.2019 and he was asked to remain present on 01.03.2019, since he was involved in some other offence of Section 307 of the IPC, the applicant was not cooperating and he was arrested on 25.12.2019 in the offence. Thus, he has submitted that for six months the applicant did not comply with the aforesaid order and hence, the application was filed before the trial court for cancellation of bail, which was ultimately allowed in light of the aforesaid non-cooperation of the applicant. Thus, he has submitted that the present application may not be entertained.