🖨️ Print / Download PDF

Meghnaben Bipinkumar Sharma Vs State Of Gujarat

Case No: R/Criminal Misc.Application No. 3428 Of 2022

Date of Decision: Feb. 10, 2022

Acts Referred: Code Of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — Section 438#Indian Penal Code, 1860 — Section 114, 306, 384, 506(1)#Gujarat Money Lenders Act, 2011 — Section 40, 42

Hon'ble Judges: Ilesh J. Vora, J

Bench: Single Bench

Advocate: Dipak H Sindhi, Krina Calla

Final Decision: Allowed

Translate: English | हिन्दी | தமிழ் | తెలుగు | ಕನ್ನಡ | मराठी

Judgement

Ilesh J. Vora, J

1. Rule. Learned APP waives service of notice of Rule on behalf of respondent-State.

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. 11217004220004 of 2022 registered with Balisana Police Station, Dist.: Patan for the offences under

Sections 306, 384, 506(1), 114 of IPC and sections 40 and 42 of Gujarat Money Lenders Act.

3. Learned advocate for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the alleged offence. It is submitted that earlier also, the

deceased had tried to commit the suicide and one FIR is lodged.

4. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the respondent â€" State has opposed grant of anticipatory bail stating inter alia that

the allegations against the applicant are grave and serious in nature and custodial interrogation is necessary for further investigation of the case.

5. Having heard the learned advocates for the parties and perusing the material placed on record and taking into consideration the facts of the case, it

appears that deceased had borrowed Rs.1,50,000/- from the present applicant. However, deceased was unable to repay the said amount. In this

background facts, considering the financial transactions entered into by the deceased with the applicant herein, prima-facie, it cannot be said that

applicant has abetted the alleged offence of suicide committed by deceased. The applicant is not having any past antecedent of like nature. In this

background facts, custodial interrogation of the applicant is not found to be essential for the purpose of investigating.

6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the role attributed to the present applicant in the alleged offence as well as co-operated

with the investigation, I find no reason to decline pre-arrest bail to the applicant. In the result, the present application is allowed. The applicant is

ordered to be released on bail in the event of her arrest in connection with a FIR being C.R. No. 11217004220004 of 2022 registered with Balisana

Police Station, Dist.: Patan on her executing a personal bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand Only) with one surety of like amount on the

following conditions:

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

(b) shall remain present at concerned Police Station on 16.02.2022 between 11.00 a.m. and 2.00 p.m.;

(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 her

from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer;

(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 her residence till

the final disposal of the case till further orders;

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

and

(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;

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

anticipatory bail order.

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

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