Allowed

Nishant Tulsidas Parmar v. State of Gujarat

Gujarat HC7 Oct 2021SCR.A/2941/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This Special Criminal Application sought modification of anticipatory bail conditions. The High Court deleted the non-exit and passport deposit requirements due to the petitioner's employment in London, imposing new conditions for annual presence in January.

What did the court decide?

Condition Nos.(g) and (f) of bail order dated 22.01.2020 deleted; passport to be returned; new condition to appear at trial court annually in January or as required.

Nishant Tulsidas Parmar Vs State of Gujarat — Quashing and FIR | Gujarat HC (2021)

¶1

R/SCR.A/2941/2021 ORDER DATED: 07/10/2021

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

¶3

R/SPECIAL CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 2941 of 2021

¶4

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

¶5

NISHANT TULSIDAS PARMAR

¶6

Versus STATE OF GUJARAT

¶7

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

¶8

Appearance:

¶9

MR HEMANT MAKWANA(3622) for the Applicant(s) No. 1 MR LB DABHI, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1

¶10

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

¶11

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.Y. KOGJE

¶12

Date : 07/10/2021

¶13

ORAL ORDER

¶14

The present petition is filed for modifying /deleting condition Nos.(g) and (f) of order dated 22.01.2020 passed by the Sessions Judge, Mahesana in Criminal Misc.Application No.91 of 2020. By the said order, the applicant was enlarged on anticipatory bail in connection with I-CR No.130 of 2015 registered with Mahesana City “B” Division Police Station for offences under Sections 498(A), 406 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3 and 7 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. The said conditions read as under:-

¶15

“(f) The applicant shall not leave the territorial jurisdiction of the State of Gujarat without prior permission of this Court.

¶16

(g) The applicant shall deposit his passport, if any held by him, or shall furnish his affidavit regarding non-holding of passport by him.”

¶17

¶18

Learned Advocate for the petitioner submitted that in

¶19

Page 1 of 4

¶20

R/SCR.A/2941/2021 ORDER DATED: 07/10/2021

¶21

compliance of the aforesaid condition, the petitioner has surrendered his passport before the trial Court. It is submitted that the offence is of 2015, where the petitioner is granted anticipatory bail. The petitioner is complying with each and every condition of bail without any breach reported so far.

¶22

2.1 Learned Advocate for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is holding British passport from 2018 and the said is valid till 2028. It is submitted that the petitioner is having job in a Bank in London and therefore, he is required to immediately join his duties.

¶23

2.2 It is submitted that two co-accused of the case have been acquitted by Chief Judicial Magistrate, Mahesana by judgment and order dated 27.04.2018 in Criminal Case No.7367 of 2015.

¶24

2.3 It is submitted that the petitioner had approached trial Court for modifying the aforesaid condition. However, the said application was rejected by order dated 09.11.2019. Against this order, the petitioner had preferred Criminal Revision Application No.87 of 2020, which too came to be rejected by Sessions Judge, Mahesana by order dated 19.12.2020.

¶25

2.4 It is submitted that the Bank of the petitioner has invited him to resume his duties after lockdown and pandemic situation. It is submitted that the petitioner is ready and willing to

¶26

Page 2 of 4

¶27

R/SCR.A/2941/2021 ORDER DATED: 07/10/2021

¶28

comply with each and every condition and shall also remain present before as and when required by the trial Court.

¶29

Learned APP opposed the petition submitting that the conditions imposed are just and proper and no modification /deletion is required.

¶30

Having heard learned Advocates for the parties and having perused the documents on record, it appears that in compliance of the aforesaid condition, the petitioner has surrendered his passport before the trial Court. The offence is of 2015, where the petitioner is granted anticipatory bail. The petitioner is complying with each and every condition of bail without any breach reported so far. The petitioner is holding British passport from 2018 and the said is valid till 2028. The petitioner is having job in a Bank in London and therefore, he is required to immediately join his duties. As submitted by learned Advocate for the petitioner, the Bank of the petitioner has invited him to resume his duties after lockdown and pandemic situation. The petitioner is also ready and willing to comply with each and every condition and shall also remain present before as and when required by the trial Court.

¶31

It also appears from the record that two co-accused of the case have been acquitted by Chief Judicial Magistrate, Mahesana by judgment and order dated 27.04.2018 in Criminal

¶32

Page 3 of 4

¶33

R/SCR.A/2941/2021 ORDER DATED: 07/10/2021

¶34

Case No.7367 of 2015.

¶35

In view of the aforesaid, the petition is allowed. Condition Nos.(g) and (f) of order dated 22.01.2020 passed by the Sessions Judge, Mahesana in Criminal Misc.Application No.91 of 2020 are hereby ordered to be deleted. It is directed that passport of the petitioner be returned to him after due verification. In lieu, following conditions are imposed:-

¶36

I. The petitioner shall remain present before the trial Court every year in the month of January till completion of trial and shall file an undertaking to this effect before the trial Court within a week from today.

¶37

II. The petitioner shall also remain present before the trial Court as and when required by the trial Court.

¶38

Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent.

¶39

Direct service is permitted.

¶40

(A.Y. KOGJE, J)

¶41

SHITOLE

¶42

Page 4 of 4

Nishant Tulsidas Parmar v. State of Gujarat

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nishant Tulsidas 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

Mahavirsinh Ramsangji Vala Vs State of Gujarat

Sureshsinh Chandrasinh Bodana Vs State of Gujarat

Aziz @ Abdul Vohra Patel Vs State of Gujarat

Vasantbhai Bhikhabhai Patel Vs State of Gujarat

Mohammed Sohail Ayub Juneja Vs State of Gujarat

Manubhai @ Harshadbhai Chamanbhai Mevada (Suthar) Vs State of Gujarat