Allowed

Virpalsinh Dilipsinh Parmar v. State of Gujarat

Gujarat HC10 Feb 2020CR.MA/1569/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Application for anticipatory bail allowed. Court held that investigation showed no substantial headway against applicant as co-accused did not implicate him. Bail granted subject to bonds and conditions including appearance and surrender of passport.

What did the court decide?

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

Virpalsinh Dilipsinh Parmar Vs State of Gujarat — Cheque Dishonour | Gujarat HC (2020)

¶1

R/CR.MA/1569/2020 ORDER

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

¶3

R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION NO. 1569 of 2020

¶4

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

¶5

VIRPALSINH DILIPSINH PARMAR

¶6

Versus STATE OF GUJARAT

¶7

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

¶8

Appearance:

¶9

MEETKUMAR J PANDIT(9479) for the Applicant(s) No. 1 MR DM DEVNANI ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR(2) for the Respondent(s) No. 1

¶10

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

¶11

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.R.UDHWANI

¶12

Date : 10/02/2020

¶13

ORAL ORDER

¶14

Rule. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor waives service of Rule on behalf of the respondent-State.

¶15

Anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 in respect of the offence registered at I- C.R. No. 79 of 2017 with Karanj Police Station is sought. The applicant is apprehending his arrest in respect of the offence punishable under Sections 465, 467, 468, 471, 472, 120B and 114 of Indian Penal Code (for short 'IPC').

¶16

Earlier similar application was withdrawn on 12.01.2018 ( Criminal Misc. Application No. 31304 of 2018). Since then it is stated that despite efforts, applicant could not be arrested as he was not found.

¶17

On consideration of the rival contentions, it would appear that since the lodgement of the FIR till this date, there is no substantial

¶18

Page 1 of 4

¶19

R/CR.MA/1569/2020 ORDER

¶20

headway in investigation insofar as involvement of the applicant herein in the aforesaid offences is concerned. The only material is in the nature of statement of co-accused and the public notice given at the instance of the applicant claiming the interest in the suit property. It is the prosecution case that conspiracy was hatched to grab the properties of the complainant by false claim and suit. Concededly, in the suit the applicant is not a party. The only role attributed to him as is evident from the public notice is that it was at his instance that the notice was issued. Beyond that, learned Additional Public Prosecutor is unable to point out any role played by the applicant in the offence in question.

¶21

4.1 Even the co-accused Bankim Trambaklal Kansara has not implicated the applicant in the offence; he only says that it was decided to seek finance from the applicant. Thus considering the aforesaid material and the fact that except as aforesaid no headway is done in the matter of investigation against the applicant and even otherwise the case is based upon the documentary evidence, the case for admitting the applicant to anticipatory bail is made out.

¶22

In the result, this application is allowed. It is directed that in the event of arrest of the applicant herein in connection with FIR registered at C.R. No.I-79 of 2017 at Karanj Police Station, the applicant shall be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond of Rs.10,000/(Rupees ten thousands only) with one surety of the like amount on the following conditions that he shall:

¶23

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

¶24

(b) remain present at the concerned Police Station on 17.02.2020 between 11.00 a.m. and 2.00 p.m.;

¶25

Page 2 of 4

¶26

R/CR.MA/1569/2020 ORDER

¶27

(c) 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/them from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer;

¶28

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

¶29

(e) 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;

¶30

(f) 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

¶31

(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 the same on merits;

¶32

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 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,

¶33

Page 3 of 4

¶34

R/CR.MA/1569/2020 ORDER

¶35

upon completion of such period of Police remand, shall be set free immediately, subject to other conditions of this anticipatory bail order.

¶36

At the trial, the Trial Court shall not be influenced by the primafacie observations made by this Court while enlarging the applicant on bail. Rule is made is made absolute.

¶37

Direct service is permitted.

¶38

(G.R.UDHWANI, J)

¶39

niru*

¶40

Page 4 of 4

Virpalsinh Dilipsinh Parmar v. State of Gujarat

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Virpalsinh Dilipsinh Parmar 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ratilal Becharbhai Patel Vs Chimanbhai Chaturbhai Parmar

Hemali Manishbhai Bhatt @ D/O Mahendrabhai Vishnubhai Vs Manish Pradyuman Bhatt

Chandrakant Dhirubahi Patel Vs Suraj Prakash Bhagat

Samatbhai Ramabhai Bharwad Vs Piyushkumar Rambhai Bharwad

Nagarbhai Chelabhai Dhunkh(Thakore) Vs Govindbhai Punjabhai Patel

Chandreshbhai Somabhai Patel Vs Ganesh Housng Corporation Ltd.