SHYAMBHAI BABUBHAI RATHOD Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This application is filed under Sec. 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for regular bail in connection with F.I.R. registered as C.R. No. 11214021220800 of 2022 with Kosamba Police Station, District, Surat (Rural) for the offences punishable under Ss. 406 , 420 , 120-B , 465 , 467 , 468 , 471 , 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.

(2.) Brief facts of the case are as under:- The complainant namely Jayantibhai Gomanbhai Patel has alleged in his complaint that in the year 2021, he had purchased three plots (Plot No.176, 177 and 178) situated at Tarsadi Village from Ketanbhai Kanchanlal Jariwala. Ketanbhai Jariwala sold the above stated plots to the complainant through registered sale deeds on 28/1/2021 before the sub registrar. It is alleged that when the complainant went to make the necessary entries in the office of city survey with regard to the said plots, he came to know that these three plots were registered in the ownership of Rina Anshu Yadav (A4). It is alleged that Rina Anshu Yadav sold these plots to Idrish Shaikh (A7). It is alleged that upon inquiry, Ketan Jariwala informed the complainant that he has not sold the said plots to anyone. The complainant therefore, allegedly obtained the copies of the sale deeds of the above plots, whereas he came to know that the said plots (plot nos. 176, 177 and 178 - revenue survey no. 683, Mauje - Tarsadi) were sold to Rina Yadav (A4) by Shyam Babubhai Rathod (A1) (the alleged power of attorney of Ketan Jariwala) on 6/7/2017 before the sub registrar. It is alleged that the purported power of attorney appended with the sale deed was executed on 24/6/2012 allegedly by Ketan Jariwala, which was conferred to Shyam Rathod (A1) in presence of notary S. V. Bachani. It is alleged that Mohsin Shaikh (A5) and Satish Vasava (A6) signed as witnesses to the affidavit before notary Minakshi Mahida on 6/7/2017. The said accused no. 5 Mohsin Shaikh and accused no. 6- Satish Vasava also stood as the witness to the sale deeds before the registrar. It is alleged that Ketan Jariwala upon verifying the documents, confirmed that power of attorney was bogus as he had never given power to anyone with respect to the plots in question, moreover, he alleged that his photo fixed on power of attorney was procured from his facebook account and the signature and thumb impression thereon are also fabricated. It is alleged that when the complainant and Ketan Jariwala went to see the said plots they found that all the three plots were grabbed by way of constructing the brick compound around it.

(3.) Learned Advocate for the applicant submits that the applicant has not committed any offence directly or indirectly as alleged in the FIR and from the perusal of the charge-sheet there is no prima facie case established against the present applicant. He submits that looking to the allegations mentioned in the FIR as well as charge-sheet, no case is made out for offence punishable for murder under sec. 302 of IPC is made out more particularly from the bare perusal of the cause of death as depicted in postmortem report. He submits that the investigation in connection with the alleged offence has been concluded and charge-sheet is filed and therefore, the possibility of tampering of evidence or influencing witness by the applicant cannot be contemplated. The applicant has already undergone imprisonment for a considerable time. Therefore, in such eventuality, further incarceration of the applicant may not be warranted. He therefore submits that considering the present application, the applicant may be enlarged on regular bail by imposing suitable conditions.