2021 Supreme(Guj) 357
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
A.S. SUPEHIA, J.
Bharatbhai @ Bhurabhai Meghabhai Bharwad - Appellant
Versus
State of Gujarat - Respondent
R/Criminal Misc.Application No. 6643 of 2021
Decided On : 10-06-2021
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : Mr Vinod M Gamara(5910)
For the Respondent: Mr Paresh M Darji(3700) Ms.Moxa Thakk ER, APP
Point of law: It would be open for the investigating agency to apply to the competent Magistrate, for police remand of the applicant, if he considers it proper and just and the Magistrate would decide it on merits. The applicant shall remain present before the concerned Magistrate on the first date of hearing of such application and on all subsequent occasions, as may be directed by the concerned Magistrate.
Headnote:
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - Section 438 - Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Sections 386, 506 (2) and 114 - Gujarat Money Lenders Act - Section 33 - Armed with deadly weapons – Commits theft on property - Case of prosecution is since the mother of the complainant namely Ramilaben was suffering from lungs problem and his car was damaged and, he was in need of money, which hence he met the accused lend him money on interest and therefore, the applicant along with complainant contacted the who happened to be the friend of the applicant - Alleged that, the co-accused Bhurabhai gave money worth complainant and the complainant executed an agreement to sale of his land in favour of Bhurabhai. It is further alleged that after some days, the applicant gave a sum complainant and complainant executed one agreement to sale in favour of the applicant. It is further alleged friend of complainant gave reference of another and that person also gave a sum complainant on interest - Alleged published a public notice in newspaper with regard to the civil suit being Special Civil Suit.
Finding of the court : Investigating agency to apply to the competent Magistrate, for police remand of the applicant, if he considers it proper and just and the Magistrate would decide it on merits. The applicant shall remain present before the concerned Magistrate on the first date of hearing of such application and on all subsequent occasions, as may be directed by the concerned Magistrate. This would be sufficient to treat accused in the judicial custody for purpose of entertaining the application of the prosecution for police remand. This is, however, without prejudice to the right of accused to seek stay against an order of remand, if, ultimately, granted, and the power of concerned Magistrate to consider such a request in accordance with law - It is clarified 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 bail order.
Result: Application is allowed
ORDER :
1. RULE. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor waives service of notice of rule for and on behalf of respondent – State.
2. Heard the learned advocates for the respective parties by video conferencing.
3. By way of the present application under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, the applicant-accused has prayed for bail in connection with the F.I.R. being C.R. No.11216001210152 of 2021 registered with Adalaj Police Station, District Gandhinagar for the offences under Sections 386, 506 (2) and 114 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Section 33 of the Gujarat Money Lenders Act.
4. The case of the prosecution is since the mother of the complainant namely Ramilaben was suffering from lungs problem and his car was damaged and, he was in need of money, which hence he met the accused on that on 24.07.2019, to lend him money on interest and therefore, the applicant along with the complainant contacted the coaccused Bhurabhai Bharwad, who happened to be the friend of the applicant. It is further alleged that, the coaccused Bhurabhai gave money worth Rs.4,50,000/to the complainant and the complainant executed an agreement to sale of his land in favour of Bhurabhai. It is further alleged that after some days, the applicant gave a sum of Rs.1,10,000/to the complainant and the complainant executed one agreement to sale in favour of the applicant. It is further alleged that, thereafter, the friend of the complainant gave reference of another coaccused namely Rajubhai Rabari and that person also gave a sum of Rs.3,00,000/to the complainant on interest. It is further alleged that, on 05.02.2021, the coaccused Bhurabhai Bharwad published a public notice in the newspaper with regard to the civil suit being Special Civil Suit No.150 of 2020 instituted by the applicant for specific performance of the contract of the agreement to sale executed between the father of the complainant and the coaccused Bhurabhai. It is further alleged that, after the abovesaid incident, on 22.02.2021, the complainant and his father met Bhurabhai and the applicant for settlement of issue but somehow such settlement was not arrived at between the parties. It is further alleged that, the coaccused Bhurabhai also gave a sum of Rs.51,00,000/- to the complainant and asked father of the complainant to execute a registered sale deed of his property/land which is mentioned in the agreement to sale executed between them. Thus, it is alleged that the accused had lend him the money, they have demanded exorbitant amount of Rs.25,00,000/- from him by charging high interest at the rate of 10% monthly.
4.1. It is further alleged that, after the aforesaid incident, the complainant went his home and consumed poison (Allout Liquid) and therefore, the father of the complainant shifted the complainant at Amruta Hospital for treatment and thereafter, the complainant had lodged the present F.I.R. against the applicant and other two persons for the offence punishable under sections 386, 506(2), 114 of the Indian Penal Code and under section 33 of the Gujarat Money Lenders Act.
5. Learned advocate for the applicant has submitted that the dispute between the parties is in civil nature, however, the complainant is trying to convert it into the criminal nature by allegedly consuming poison (Allout Liquid). It is submitted that the conduct of the complainant speaks about a volumes with regard to cheat persons by executing various agreements to sale of his agricultural land in favour of different persons. It is further submitted that, the father of the complainant has also executed a registered agreement to sale in favour of Bindesh Vishnubhai Patel on 22.06.2020. It is further submitted that the father of the complainant also executed another registered agreement to sale in favour of Bipinbhai Dahyabhai Patel on 21.07.2020. It is further submitted that, modus of the father of the complainant and the complainant clearly shows that, they have cheated various persons like the prese