YOGESHBHAI RAMESHBHAI PATEL Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned Advocate Mr.Dipak Patel appearing on behalf of the applicant and learned APP Mr.Dabhi for the respondent State.

(2.) By way of this application under Sec. 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, the applicant - original accused, apprehending his arrest in connection with FIR No. 11196004220190 of 2022 registered with Gotri Police Station, Vadodara City, on 1/3/2022 for offences punishable under Ss. 406, 408, 409, 465, 467, 468, 470, 471, 473, 474, 504, 506 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code, prays for being released on anticipatory bail.

(3.) Learned Advocate Mr.Dipak Patel for the applicant would submit that while the allegation as levelled in the FIR is with regard to various persons having connived together and causing a loss to the Company of the complainant, more particularly by showing the properties, which were of lesser value as being of higher value, but at the same time, according to the learned Advocate Mr.Patel, the only role attributed to the present applicant is of receiving an amount of approximately Rs.1,70,000.00 and Rs.3,31,800.00 from two of the other accused and whereas it is further submitted that, in fact, the accused who had transferred the amount of Rs.3,31,800.00 to the account of the present applicant has already been released on anticipatory bail. Learned Advocate Mr. Patel would also draw the attention of this Court to the order dtd. 21/4/2022 passed by the learned Sessions Court, Vadodara, in Criminal Misc. Application No. 600 of 2022, whereby one of the co-accused Prakash Radheshyam Mali, from whose account an amount of Rs.3,31,800.00 had been transferred to the account of the present applicant, had been released on anticipatory bail by the Court concerned. Learned Advocate would submit that having regard to the fact that while there is no specific allegation of being involved in the conspiracy against the present applicant, since one of the persons, who according to the FIR, was part of the conspiracy, having been granted anticipatory bail by the learned Sessions Court, benefit of parity may also be given to the present applicant. Learned Advocate Mr. Patel would submit that under such circumstances, the present applicant may be released on anticipatory bail by this Court. Learned Advocate Mr. Patel for the applicant on instructions states that the applicant is ready and willing to abide by all the conditions including imposition of conditions with regard to powers of Investigating Agency to file an application before the competent Court for his remand. Learned Advocate would further submit that upon filing of such application by the Investigating Agency, the right of applicant-accused to oppose such application on merits may be kept open.