Allowed

Vishal Babubhai Patel v. State of Gujarat

Gujarat HC20 Feb 2019CR.MA/660/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Gujarat granted anticipatory bail to the applicant accused in an FIR cheating and forgery case. The court applied the law laid down in Mhetre and Sibbia cases, considering that the primary allegations were against co-accused, civil proceedings were pending, and no evidence of forged documents was alleged. Bail was granted subject to specific conditions including a personal bond.

What did the court decide?

Application allowed; applicant to be released on bail in event of arrest on executing personal bond of Rs. 10,000 with one surety of like amount on specified conditions.

Vishal Babubhai Patel Vs State of Gujarat — Cheating and Forgery | Gujarat HC (2019)

¶1

R/CR.MA/660/2019 ORDER

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

¶3

R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION NO. 660 of 2019

¶4

==========================================================

¶5

VISHAL BABUBHAI PATEL

¶6

Versus STATE OF GUJARAT

¶7

==========================================================

¶8

Appearance:

¶9

MR SUNILSINH J CHAUHAN(8334) for the PETITIONER(s) No. 1 MS DHARA P BHATT(7530) for the RESPONDENT(s) No. 1 MR. PARTH H BHATT(6381) for the RESPONDENT(s) No. 1 MS SHRUTI PATHAK, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR(2) for the RESPONDENT(s) No. 1

¶10

==========================================================

¶11

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE VIPUL M. PANCHOLI

¶12

Date : 20/02/2019 ORAL ORDER

¶13

1. Rule . Ms.Shruti Pathak, Learned APP, waives service of notice of Rule on behalf of respondent-State.

¶14

2. By way of the present application under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, the applicant-accused has prayed for anticipatory bail in connection with the FIR being C.R.No.I– 234 of 2018 registered with Cahndkheda Police Station, District Ahmedabad, for the offences punishable under Sections 406, 420, 465 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code.

¶15

3. Learned advocate for the applicant submits that the nature of allegations are such for which custodial interrogation at this stage is not necessary. He further submits that the applicant will keep himself available during the course of investigation, trial also and will not flee from justice.

¶16

Page 1 of 6

¶17

R/CR.MA/660/2019 ORDER

¶18

4.Learned advocate for the applicant on
instructions states that the applicant is ready
and willing to abide by all the conditions
including imposition of conditions with regard
to powers of Investigating Agency to file an
application before the competent Court for his
remand. He further submits that upon filing of
such application by the Investigating Agency,
the right of applicant accused to oppose such
application on merits may be kept open. Learned
advocate, therefore, submitted that considering
the above facts, the applicant may be granted
anticipatory bail.

¶19

5.Learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing
on behalf of the respondent – State and learned
advocate Mr.Parth H. Bhatt appearing for the
original first informant have vehemently opposed
this application. It is pointed out by the
learned advocates from the allegations made in
the FIR against the applicant that development
agreement was executed by the original land
owners and one of the signatories of the said
agreement, namely, accused No.1 Deep Mukeshbhai
Patel has violated Condition No.5 of the said
agreement and, thereby, the said accused has
executed Banakhat i.e. Agreement to Sell in
favour of the present applicant. When the
present applicant has issued the public notice
in the newspaper, the first informant came to
know about the same. Thus, the present applicant
in connivance with the accused Deep Mukeshbhai

¶20

Page 2 of 6

¶21

R/CR.MA/660/2019 ORDER

¶22

Patel have executed Banakhat with a view to
frustrate the rights of the first informant and
land owners. Thus, looking to the role played by
the applicant, he may not be released on
anticipatory bail.

¶23

6.Learned Additional Public Prosecutor has also
pointed out from the public notice issued in the
concerned newspaper and submitted that the
present applicant is trying to sabotage the
entire transaction and construction which is
made upto 80%. It is, therefore, urged that this
application may not be entertained.

¶24

7.Having heard the learned advocates for the
parties and perusing the material placed on
record and taking into consideration the facts
of the case, nature of allegations, gravity of
offence, role attributed to the accused, without
discussing the evidence in detail, at this
stage, this Court is inclined to grant
anticipatory bail to the applicant.

¶25

8.This Court has also considered the following
aspects:

¶26

(i)the only allegation against the applicant
in the FIR is that original accused No.1- Deep
Maukeshbhai Patel has executed Banakhat in
favour of the applicant. However, the allegation
is against the co-accused that he has violated
one of the conditions of the development
agreement; and

¶27

(ii)public notice was issued in the newspaper

¶28

Page 3 of 6

¶29

R/CR.MA/660/2019 ORDER

¶30

on 18.04.2018 and, thereafter, the present
applicant has also filed Civil Suit No.116 of
2018 before the concerned Court for cancellation
of the development agreement. Thus, the civil
proceedings are pending before the competent
Court with regard to the subject land. The
applicant is placing reliance upon the Agreement
to Sell executed by original accused No.1 Deep
Mukeshbhai Patel in his favour. It is not
alleged that the said document is a forged one.
Therefore, the custodial interrogation of the
applicant is not required for recovery of the
said document.

¶31

9.This Court has also taken into consideration the
law laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the
case of Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre vs. State
of Maharashtra and Ors. as reported at(2011) 1
SCC 694, wherein the Hon’ble Apex Court
reiterated the law laid down by the Constitution
Bench in the case of Shri Gurubaksh Singh Sibbia
& Ors. Vs. State of Punjab, as reported at
(1980) 2 SCC 665.

¶32

10.In the result, the present application is
allowed. The applicant is ordered to be released
on bail in the event of his arrest in connection
with a FIR being C.R.No.I–234 of 2018 registered
with Cahndkheda Police Station, District
Ahmedabad,on his executing a personal bond of
Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand Only) with one
surety of like amount on the following
conditions:

¶33

Page 4 of 6

¶34

R/CR.MA/660/2019 ORDER

¶35

(a) shall cooperate with the investigation and make himself available for interrogation whenever required;

¶36

(b) shall remain present at concerned Police Station on 27.02.2019 between 11.00 a.m. and 2.00 p.m.;

¶37

(c) shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the fact of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer;

¶38

(d) shall not obstruct or hamper the police investigation and not to play mischief with the evidence collected or yet to be collected by the police;

¶39

(e) shall at the time of execution of bond, furnish the address to the investigating officer and the court concerned and shall not change his residence till the final disposal of the case till further orders;

¶40

(f) shall not leave India without the permission of the Court and if having passport shall deposit the same before the Trial Court within a week; and

¶41

(g) it would be open to the Investigating Officer to file an application for remand if he considers it proper and just and the learned Magistrate would decide it on merits;

¶42

11. Despite this order, it would be open for the Investigating Agency to apply to the competent Magistrate, for police remand of the applicant. The applicant shall remain present before the learned Magistrate on the first date of hearing of such application and on all subsequent occasions, as may be directed by the learned

¶43

Page 5 of 6

¶44

R/CR.MA/660/2019 ORDER

¶45

Magistrate. This would be sufficient to treat
the accused in the judicial custody for the
purpose of entertaining application of the
prosecution for police remand. This is, however,
without prejudice to the right of the accused to
seek stay against an order of remand, if,
ultimately, granted, and the power of the
learned Magistrate to consider such a request in
accordance with law. It is clarified that the
applicant, even if, remanded to the police
custody, upon completion of such period of
police remand, shall be set free immediately,
subject to other conditions of this anticipatory
bail order.

¶46

12. At the trial, the Trial Court shall not be influenced by the prima facie observations made by this Court in the present order.

¶47

13. Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent. Direct service is permitted.

¶48

(VIPUL M. PANCHOLI, J)

¶49

piyush

¶50

Page 6 of 6

Vishal Babubhai Patel v. State of Gujarat

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vishal Babubhai Patel v. State of Gujarat

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Pravinbhai Manjibhai Ghoghari Vs State of Gujarat

Jagdish Chhogaji Barot Vs State of Gujarat

Labhubhai Narshibhai Baraiya Vs State of Gujarat

Ankurbhai Manibhai Patel Vs State of Gujarat

Khimjibhai Premjibhai Moradiya Vs State of Gujarat

Idrishbhai Gulambhai Gudala Vs State of Gujarat