NARESHBHAI CHHAGANBHAI PATEL (KACHHADIYA) Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present application is filed under section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 by the applicant for regular bail in connection with an FIR being C.R.No. I-168/2016 registered with Kamrej Police Station, Surat, District: Surat for the offences punishable under Sections 406, 420, 465, 467, 468, 471, 120 and 114 of the Indian Penal Code.

(2.) Learned advocate for the applicant submits that the present applicant is innocent person, however, he has been falsely implicated in the alleged offence. It is submitted that in fact, dispute between complainant and applicant is of a Civil nature but, only with a view to cause harassment, it has been 4 of 10 converted in to Criminal complaint. It is also submitted that the relevant documents have been collected by the concerned Investigating Officer and if, some documents are still required to be recovered, the applicant will co-operate to the concerned Investigating Officer to trace out such documents. Learned advocate, Mr. Mangukiya, submits that the offences alleged against the applicant are triable by the Learned Magistrate Court. It is further submitted that the applicant is a resident of Surat and is also having responsibility to look after his business and maintain his family. Therefore, there is no possibility of fleeing away and his presence can be secured at the time of trial by imposing appropriate conditions as may be deemed fit and proper by this Court. It is further submitted that the investigation is over, charge sheet is filed, and therefore, now there is no possibility of tampering with the evidence and the applicant is ready and willing to abide by the conditions that may be imposed while releasing the applicant on regular bail. Learned advocate, Mr. B.M.Magukiya, further submits that the applicant will deposit Rs. 5,00,000/- before the concerned Trial Court without prejudice to his rights and contentions, and the concerned Trial Court may be directed to keep said amount in Fixed deposit till the conclusion of Trial. It is therefore submitted that considering the nature of allegations, and the role attributed to the applicant, he may be enlarged on regular bail by imposing suitable conditions.

(3.) Learned Additional Public Prosecutor, appearing for the State, opposed the application and submits that from the charge sheet papers, there appears to be a prima facie case against the applicant for committing the alleged offence, and therefore, looking to the gravity of the offence, he may not be enlarged on bail. However, learned Additional Public Prosecutor has not disputed the fact regarding grant of bail to the co-accused having similar allegations against him.