The court emphasized the need for caution in exercising the power of arrest and the requirement to record reasons for arrest, as laid down by the Supreme Court in Arnesh Kumar vs. State of Bihar.

Since the issues raised in the above captioned matters are interrelated those were heard analogously and are being disposed of by this common judgment and order.

2. The petitioner is sought to be prosecuted of the offence under Sections 213, 214, 217 and 120-B of the Indian Penal Code read with Sections 7, 8, 9, 12, 13(1) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 on the strength of a First Information Report registered with the DCB Police Station, Surat vide I-CR No.37/2013.

3. Case of the prosecution:-

3.1 A person, by name Asaram Bapu claims to be a Saint. His son, namely, Narayansai also claims to be a Saint. The father and son have many Ashrams all over the State and one of those is situated at Ahmedabad. On 11th December, 2013 Shri J. K. Zala, Asst. Commissioner of Police, ‘D’ Dvn., Surat City lodged a First Information Report referred to above making a reference in the same of one other offence registered on 6/10/2013 at the Jahangirpura Police Station vide C.R. No. 31 of 2013 for the offences punishable under sections 376, 377, 354, 357, 342, 346, 143, 147, 148,149, 506(2) and 120-B of the Indian Penal Code against Narayansai. It appears that in the course of the investigation, the investigating agency seized 42 bags containing documents from the Ashram premises of the co-accused Narayansai. With a view to see that the case registered against Narayansai of the offence of rape gets weakened, a conspiracy is alleged to have been hatched by the accused persons which includes the present applicant to bribe the Police Officers and see to it that the 42 bags containing various documents are replaced with the 42 bags containing other papers irrelevant for the purpose of investigation. It is the case of the prosecution that the applicant herein-original accused no.3 was the Administrator of the Ashram of Shri Asaram Bapu situated at Ahmedabad. He was handling all the financial matters of the Ashram along with the other co-accused. It is alleged that the applicant along with the other co-accused arranged for Rs.4.00 crore to be paid to the police authorities by way of bribe for the purpose of securing the 42 bags containing documentary evidence and replacing the same with irrelevant papers. It is the case of the prosecution that the 42 bags containing various documents relate to the total assets of Asaram Bapu and his son Narayansai. The Commissioner of Police got the hint of such conspiracy which was hatched and accordingly the FIR being I-C.R.No.37/2013 was registered.

3.2 It appears from the materials on record that few persons were arrested in connection with I-C.R.No.37/2013 registered with the DCB Police Station, Surat City. After completion of the investigation the police filed charge-sheet dated 9th February, 2014 in the Court of the Special Judge, Surat City of the offence referred to above against the following 9 persons.

1) Chandubhai Mohanbhai Kumbhani

2) Uday Navinchandra Sanghani

3) Ketan Mahadv Patel

4) Dhiraj Nariman Patel

5) Hashmukh @ Hasudada Dalpatbhai Upadhyay

6) Bhavesh Chaturbhai Patel

7) Hitendrasinh Hamirsinh Waghela

8) Naresh @ Rupabhai Bhungdamal Manka

9) Narayan Sai.

In the charge-sheet the following persons were shown as the absconding accused.

1) Bhadresh Manharbhai Patel

2) Kaushik Vani

3) Kantibhai Devshibhai Patel (Applicant herein)

3.3 Thus, the applicant herein was shown as an absconding accused in the charge-sheet which was filed against 9 accused referred to above.

3.4 It also appears from the materials on record that since the applicant herein was shown in Column No.2 of the charge-sheet as an absconding accused, he thought fit to file Criminal Misc. Application no.3007/2014 praying for the following reliefs :

A) This Hon’ble Court be pleased to quash and set aside the FIR bearing DCB Police Station, Surat City bearing 1st C.R. No. 37/2013 for the alleged offences under Section 213, 214, 217 and 120 (B) of IPC read with Section 7, 8, 9, 12, 13(1) of Prevention of Corruption Act