MAYURI HIMMATLAL PANCHAL Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By way of the present application under Sec. 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, the applicant has prayed to release her on anticipatory bail in case of her arrest in connection with the FIR registered as C.R. No. 11211031210239 of 2021 with Limbdi Police Station, District-Surendranagar, for the offences punishable under Ss. 463 , 464 , 465 , 467 , 471 , 499 , 500 , 501 , 502 of the Indian Penal Code. It is the case of the first informant that unknown person has created his false and fabricated Resignation Letter and submitted it to the Principal District Judge, Surendrana1gar, which was learnt by first informant on on 22/9/2021, when the Principal District Judge sought an explanation regarding said resignation.

(2.) Mr.Sandip Munjyasara, learned advocate for the applicant submits that the applicant has served for more than eight and a half years as a Civil Judge in State Judiciary and on 11/3/2022, the petitioner came to be discharged simplicitor from service with immediate effect. She is not named in FIR and if she is arrayed as an accused, it will ruin her career and reputation. He further submitted that if she is not granted bail, it will affect her service matter being Special Civil Application No.5295 of 2022 pending before this Court. He also submitted that since the first informant is Additional District and Sessions Judge, Limbdi, if an application is moved before the Sessions Court it will go before the same Court and there are all the chances that the matter will not be heard and decided fairly. He also submitted that since the applicant has issued notices against Collector, Range IG and Superintendent of Police and Police Inspector, it has resulted into a vindictive action against her. He also submitted that the applicant is called in violation of Sec. 160 of CRPC by police arbitrarily. He also submitted that the FIR is more than 14 months old. He also submitted that the applicant is available during the course of investigation and will not flee from justice. In view of the above, he prayed that the applicant may be granted anticipatory bail. He has relied upon following decisions in support of his submissions:-

(3.) On other hand, 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. He submitted that the offence is very serious in nature. He also submitted that the allegation with regard to creating false and fabricating resignation of the first informant is very serious as the first informant is a Judicial Officer serving in the State Judiciary. He further submitted that the applicant has not approached the trial Court and has directly approached before this Court. He submitted that the applicant has to approach the trial Court first and only because the first informant is a judicial officer, the applicant cannot approach this Court directly without approaching the trial Court first. In view of all these, he has submitted that this is not a fit case for grant of anticipatory bail and this application may be rejected and the applicant may be permitted to approach the concerned Sessions Court.