SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT
A.Y. KOGJE, J.
Rajubai Bhalubhai Bharvad (Mevada) - Appellant
Versus
State Of Gujarat - Respondent
Special Criminal Application No. 2176 of 2018 with Special Criminal Application No. 3563 of 2017
Decided on : 02-11-2018

Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant :Mr. I.H Syed, with Mr.Chirag B Upadhyay, Mr.Alak A Pandya, Advocates
For the Respondent: Mr. Mitesh Amin, Public Prosecutor

Headnote:

Criminal Procedure, 1973 – section 439,167(2) – Indian Penal Code.1860 – Section 406, 420, 467, 468, 120B – Price Chits and Money Circulation Schemes (Banning) Act – Sections 4, 5 and 6 – Gujarat Protection of Interest of Depositors Act – Sections 3,4 and 7 – In all three proceedings, subject matter is pertaining to bail/default bail of petitioner – Regarding section 167(2) of Cr.P.C application and rejected the same – Held, Once Court enlarged petitioner on bail by exercising power under section 439 of Cr.P.C. subsequent cancellation of bail exercise of powers under section 439(2) petitioner being re-arrested – Thereafter, changed his track to claim default bail and upon his release on bail, period prescribed under section 167(2) of Cr.P.C., become irrelevant – Petitioner is arrested twice for one offence situation not contemplated under provisions of Cr.P.C. and therefore, arrest of petitioner will have to be held arrest pursuant to issuance of arrest warrant and not connection with investigation of offence – Special Criminal Application rejected – [Paras 17 & 19]

Facts of the case:

In all three Criminal proceedings, subject matter is pertaining to bail/default bail of petitioner – Regarding section 167(2) of Cr.P.C application and rejected the same.

Findings of the court:

Once Court enlarged petitioner on bail by exercising power under section 439 of Cr.P.C., 1973 and subsequent cancellation of bail exercise of powers under section 439(2) petitioner being re-arrested – Thereafter, changed his track to claim default bail and upon his release on bail, period prescribed under section 167(2) of Cr.P.C., become irrelevant – Petitioner is arrested twice for one offence situation is not contemplated under provisions of Cr.P.C. and therefore, arrest of petitioner will have to be held arrest pursuant to issuance of arrest warrant and not in connection with investigation of offence.

Result: Special Criminal Application rejected

JUDGMENT

A.Y. Kogje, J.

Rule. Learned Additional waives service of rule on behalf of respondent-State.

This group of matters are arising out of the same Crime Register being FIR C.R.No.I-1 of 2016 registered with CID Crime, Vadodara Rural. The petitioner is an accused of aforesaid offence which came to be registered for offence under Sections 406, 420, 467, 468, 120B of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 4, 5 and 6 of the Price Chits and Money Circulation Schemes (Banning) Act and Sections 3,4 and 7 of the Gujarat Protection of Interest of Depositors Act.

2. In all the three proceedings, the subject matter is pertaining to bail/default bail of the petitioner.

3. The facts in brief are that the petitioner is an accused in connection with this offence for which the petitioner filed Criminal Misc. Application No.13724 of 2016 before this Court for regular bail under section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short “the Cr.P.C.). This Court by an order dated 26.07.2016 was pleased to enlarge the petitioner on regular bail by imposing several conditions for bail. The conditions relevant for the purpose of this case are as under:-

5(g) deposit an amount of Rs. 1,25,03,000/- in following manner:

Rs.25,00,000/- within two weeks;

Rs.25,00,000/- on or before 31.08.2016;

Rs.25,00,000/- on or before 30.09.2016;

Rs.25,00,000/- on or before 31.10.2016;

Rs.25,03,000/- on or before 30.11.2016

The accounts as well as receipts of amounts shall be furnished to the concerned I.O. as well as concerned Trial Court. Once the entire amount is deposited before the concerned Trial Court, the concerned Trial Court shall distribute the same amongst the victims in proportion to the amount deposited or distributed after proper verification;

[h] make payment to the depositors/investors whose names are included/shown in the list provided by the Investigating Officer to his satisfaction within a period of one week from the date of his release. He shall also pay to the depositors who may come forward before the Investigating Officer or before the concerned Court on or before filing of the supplementary charge-sheet.”

3.1 It appears that as the petitioner was unable to fulfill the condition No.5(g), an application was moved by the State under section 439(2) of the Cr.P.C., 1973 for cancellation of bail. The learned 8th Additional Sessions Judge, Vadodara by an order dated 08.05.2017 ordered cancellation of bail and directed issuance of arrest warrant. The petitioner also filed Special Criminal Application No.3563 of 2017 on 12.05.2017, challenging the order dated 08.05.2017, whereby the bail of the petitioner was cancelled and arrest warrant was issued.

3.2 The petitioner therefore, moved Criminal Misc. Application No.01 of 2017 in Criminal Misc. Application No.13724 of 2016 on 04.08.2017, inter alia, praying for deletion of condition No.5(g) of the bail order dated 26.07.2016 passed in Criminal Misc. Application No.13724 of 2016.

3.3 Pursuant to the arrest warrant, the petitioner came to be arrested on 22.09.2017. The petitioner was thereafter, in judicial custody. The petitioner filed an application under section 167(2) of the Cr.P.C., 1973 before the Court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate on 26.12.2017, which was ordered to fix for hearing on 27.12.2017. By an order dated 27.12.2017, the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Vadodara rejected the application under section 167(2) of the Cr.P.C., 1973 for default bail on the ground that on 27.12.2017 at 13:40 hours, charge-sheet was filed. After filing of the charge-sheet, at the request of learned advocate for the petitioner, the learned Magistrate took up the hearing of 167(2) application and rejected the same. The petitioner thereafter, preferred Revision Application being Criminal Revision Application No.310 of 2017 before the Court of Sessions Judge at Vadodara. By an order dated 04.01.2018, the Sessions Judge, Vadodara remanded the matter back to the Court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Vadodara fo









































Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top