STATE OF GUJARAT Vs. VIJAYBHAI HARIBHAI TANK

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This application is filed by the State under Section 439(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as the Code) for quashing and setting aside the order dated 28.07.2021 passed by the Sessions Court, whereby the respondentaccused has been enlarged on regular bail.

(2.) Learned APP Ms. Moxa Thakker appearing for the applicant - State submitted that FIR being C.R.No.11216008210286 of 2021 has been registered against the respondent - accused for the alleged offence punishable under Sections 406, 420 and 114 of the Indian Penal Code and under Sections 4(1)(2)(3) and 5 of the Gujarat Land Grabbing Act, 2020. It is submitted that respondent accused is shown as accused No.1 in the FIR in question. It is mainly alleged that Live and Licence Agreement was executed by the complainant in favour of the respondent - accused. However, the respondent - accused and accused No.2 did not pay the rents and thereby they have committed the alleged offence. It is further submitted that the investigating officer filed an affidavit before the Sessions Court and thereby opposed the bail application filed by the respondent accused. In the said affidavit, the IO has specifically narrated about the antecedents of the respondent - accused, in spite of that, the Sessions Court has released the respondent - accused on bail without referring to the said antecedents. It is submitted that respondent - accused has committed serious offence and therefore the impugned order passed by the Sessions Court be quashed and set aside and thereby the bail granted to the respondent - accused be cancelled.

(3.) I have perused the material placed on record. I have also considered the submissions canvassed by learned APP. From the allegations levelled in the FIR, it is revealed that the dispute is between the complainant and the respondent - accused and the said dispute is with regard to the Live and Licence Agreement and as per the allegations, the respondent - accused and other accused have not paid the amount of rent to the complainant. From the record, it appears that the dispute is pending before the arbitrator in spite of that the complainant has filed the FIR against the respondent - accused. It is pertinent to note that after the respondent accused was arrested, remand was sought for by the IO and after the remand period was over, the Sessions Court has released the respondent - accused on regular bail. Learned APP has failed to point out how the State is affected by grant of regular bail to the respondent - accused as the dispute between the parties is of private in nature.