Allowed

Ranshibhai Karsanbhai Rajani v. State of Gujarat

Gujarat HC7 Dec 2021CR.MA/5792/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This High Court granted anticipatory bail to an accused accused of offenses under the Gujarat Land Grabbing Prohibition Act, 2020, noting his role as a purchaser and lack of antecedents, subject to standard conditions including cooperation and a personal bond.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted on a personal bond of Rs. 25,000 with one surety, subject to specific conditions regarding investigation cooperation and residence.

Ranshibhai Karsanbhai Rajani Vs State of Gujarat — Land Acquisition | Gujarat HC (2021)

¶1

R/CR.MA/5792/2021 ORDER DATED: 07/12/2021

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

¶3

R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION NO. 5792 of 2021

¶4

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

¶5

RANSHIBHAI KARSANBHAI RAJANI

¶6

Versus

¶7

STATE OF GUJARAT

¶8

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

¶9

Appearance:

¶10

AKASH A SINGH(8713) for the Applicant(s) No. 1 MS. MOXA THAKKAR, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1

¶11

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

¶12

CORAM: HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE ASHOKKUMAR C. JOSHI

¶13

Date : 07/12/2021

¶14

ORAL ORDER

¶15

Heard learned Advocate Akash A. Singh for the Applicant and learned APP Ms. Moxa Thakkar for the Respondent – State of Gujarat.

¶16

By way of the present application under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, the applicant-accused has prayed for enlarging him on anticipatory bail in connection with the FIR No. 1 1 2 0 2 0 0 2 2 1 0 2 9 3 registered with City ‘C’ Division Police Station, Jamnagar for the offenses punishable under Sections 4(3) and 5(e) of The Gujarat Land Grabbing Prohibition Act 2020.

¶17

Learned Advocate for the Applicant has submitted that the Applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection the aforesaid FIR and in this connection the earlier application filed by the Applicant before the learned Sessions Court came to be dis-allowed. Learned Advocate for the Applicant has further submitted that the Applicant is only a purchaser and as such there are no antecedents. Learned Advocate for the Applicant has therefore submitted the present application may kindly be allowed.

¶18

Page 1 of 5

¶19

R/CR.MA/5792/2021 ORDER DATED: 07/12/2021

¶20

Learned Advocate for the Applicant has further argued that the applicant will keep himself available during the course of investigation and trial also and will not flee from justice.

¶21

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 submit 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.

¶22

Learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the respondent – State has opposed grant of anticipatory bail looking to the nature and gravity of the offence. Learned APP has submitted that the investigation be continued.

¶23

Having heard the arguments advanced by 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 offences, role attributed to the accused, without discussing the evidence in detail, at this stage, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the applicant.

¶24

This Court has considered following aspects,

¶25

(a) The role attributed the Applicant is that the Applicant is a purchaser.

¶26

(b) As such there are no antecedents. (c) as per catena of decisions of Hon'ble Supreme Court there are

¶27

mainly two factors which are required to be considered by this court;

¶28

(i) prima facie case (ii) requirement of accused for custodial interrogation.

¶29

Page 2 of 5

¶30

R/CR.MA/5792/2021 ORDER DATED: 07/12/2021

¶31

Therefore, in the facts and circumstances of the present case, this court is inclined to consider the case of the applicant.

¶32

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., 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 , reported at (1980) 2 SCC 565 . Further, this Court has also taken into consideration the ratio laid down in the case of Sushila Aggarwal and Ors. v. State (NCT of Delhi) and Anr. in Special Leave Petition No. 72817282/2017 dated 29.01.2020 .

¶33

In the result, the present application is allowed. The applicant is ordered to be released on anticipatory bail in the event of his arrest in connection with a FIR No. 1 1 2 0 2 0 0 2 2 1 0 2 9 3 registered with City ‘C’ Division Police Station, Jamnagar for the offenses punishable under Sections 4(3) and 5(e) of The Gujarat Land Grabbing Prohibition Act 2020 on executing a personal bond of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand Only) with one surety of like amount on the following conditions;

¶34

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

¶35

(b) shall remain present at concerned Police Station on 7.1.2022 between 12.00 Noon and 2.00 p.m.;

¶36

(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;

¶37

Page 3 of 5

¶38

R/CR.MA/5792/2021 ORDER DATED: 07/12/2021

¶39

(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; (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 concerned trial court and if having passport shall deposit the same before the concerned 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 the remand application without being influenced of the observations made by this Court;

¶42

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

¶43