HINESH PRAVIN PANCHOLI Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rule. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor waives service of notice of rule on behalf of the respondent-State.

(2.) Learned advocate for the applicant submits that there are no criminal antecedents against the present applicant, the FIR is lodged in the Year 2021 for the incident that has occurred in the Year 2019 i.e. after a span of two years. The applicant is falsely implicated in the present offence merely because he has lended money to the complainant, which he was asking back and that is why in order to not to return the money this false complaint is filed against the applicant as well as other persons who have lended the money to the complainant. Learned advocate for the applicant on instructions also states that the applicant is ready and willing to abide by all the conditions including imposition of condition with regard to power of investigating agency to file an application before the competent Court for his remand. He has further submitted that upon filing such application by the investigating agency, the right of the applicant- accused to oppose such application on merits may be kept open. He submits that considering the nature of allegations, role attributed to the applicant, the applicant may be enlarged on anticipatory bail by imposing suitable conditions.

(3.) Learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the respondent-State has opposed grant of anticipatory bail looking to the nature and gravity of the offence.