BALJINDARSINH RISHIPALSINH SHANKARJI RAJPUT Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rule returnable forthwith. The learned APP waives service of notice of rule for and on behalf of the respondent-State.

(2.) By way of the present application under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, the applicants-original accused have prayed to release them on anticipatory bail in the event of their arrest in connection with the FIR registered at the Mehsana Taluka Police Station, District: Mehsana, vide C.R. Prohibition No.07 of 2018, for the offences punishable under Sections 65E , 116B , 81 , 98(2) of the Prohibition Act. The learned advocate appearing on behalf of the applicants would submit that considering the nature of the offence, the applicants may be enlarged on anticipatory bail by imposing suitable conditions. On the other hand, the learned APP appearing on behalf of the respondent-State has opposed this application for grant of anticipatory bail to the applicants looking to the nature and gravity of the offence. I have heard the learned advocates appearing for the respective parties, perused the investigation papers and have also taken into consideration the facts of the case, nature of the allegations, role attributed to the applicants-accused, and without discussing the evidence in detail, at this stage, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the applicants. This Court has taken into consideration the following aspects:-

(3.) The learned advocate for the applicants, on instructions, states that the applicants are ready and willing to abide by all the conditions, including impositions of conditions with regard to the powers of the Investigating Agency to file an application before the competent court for their remand. He would further submit that upon filing of such application by the Investigating Agency, the right of the applicants- accused to oppose such application on merits may be kept open.