PRADUMANSINH GAJENDRASINH SOLANKI Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This successive bail application is filed by the applicant under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for short, 'the Code') for regular bail in connection with FIR registered at C.R. No. I-20 of 2016 with Vastrapur Police Station, Ahmedabad City for the offences punishable under Sections 408 , 409 , 420 and 114 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short, 'the IPC ').

(2.) Heard Mr. Amit Chaudhary, the learned advocate for the applicant and Ms. M. H. Bhatt, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the respondent - State and Mr. P. P. Majmudar, the learned advocate appearing for the original complainant. 2.1 The learned advocate for the applicant submits that the applicant is an innocent person, however, he has been falsely implicated in the offence. It is submitted that present is the successive bail application after withdrawal of the earlier bail application, after filing of the charge-sheet. He submitted that the police has recovered substantial amount of about Rs.70 lakh out of total stake amount of Rs.1,35,82,309/-as per the FIR. Further, the applicant has also deposited an amount of Rs.8,50,000/- by now, without prejudice to his rights and contentions, and as per instructions available to him, the applicant is ready and willing to deposit an additional amount of Rs.1,50,000/-, without prejudice to his rights and contentions, however, for that, he requests that reasonable time may be given. The learned advocate for the applicant further submitted that trial has commenced and there are in all 42 witnesses. In the said circumstances, the learned advocate for the applicant requests that present application may be considered favourably as the charge-sheet is filed, trial has commenced, substantial amount has been recovered and the applicant is also ready to deposit the additional amount as aforesaid. 2.2 It is also submitted that by the learned advocate for the applicant that the applicant has roots in Ahmedabad and is also having responsibility towards family and is not likely to run away and his presence can be secured during trial by imposing the the suitable conditions.

(3.) The learned Additional Public Prosecutor as well as the learned advocate for the original complainant oppose the grant of bail looking to the nature and gravity of offences. It is submitted that from the charge-sheet, there appears prima facie case against the applicant in committing the alleged offence and accordingly, it is requested that the applicant may not be enlarged on bail.