JUDGMENT :

1. RULE. Learned APP waives service of notice of rule for and on behalf of the respondent-State.

2. The present application has been filed for cancellation of regular bail granted to the respondent No.2-original accused No.1 vide order dated 24.05.2021 in Criminal Misc. Application No.3410 of 2021 passed by the City Sessions Judge, Ahmedabad.

3. Learned advocate Mr.Rajput for the applicant has submitted that the original accused– respondent No.2 had filed an affidavit dated 16.03.2022 stating that he is ready and willing to deposit an amount of Rs.53,21,212/- out of Rs.70,94,950/- on or before 30.07.2022. He has invited attention of this Court to the order dated 24.05.2021, whereby the respondent No.2, who was ordered to be released on regular bail, has submitted that the conditions as mentioned in the said order are violated as he has not deposited any amount. He has further submitted that accordingly the applicant–complainant had filed an application for cancellation of bail however, the same has been rejected by the order dated 08.09.2021. Learned advocate has submitted that the bail granted to the respondent No.2 is required to be cancelled and the orders dated 08.09.2021 as well as 24.05.2021 are required to be quashed and set aside.

4. Learned advocate for the respondent No.2- original accused No.1, while inviting attention of this Court has submitted that the respondent No.2 had also filed the affidavit dated 16.03.2022 in the present application, wherein he has stated that he will make payment of Rs.5,00,000/- on or before 31.03.2022 and further payment of Rs.10,00,000/- will be paid on or before 30.04.2022 and remaining amount of Rs.38,21,212/- will be paid on or before 30.07.2022. Learned advocate, upon instructions of the respondent No.2, has submitted that as per the instructions, he has not deposited any amount.

5. Heard the learned advocates for the respective parties and also perused the documents as pointed out by them.

6. An F.I.R being C.R. No.11191040210465 of 2021 was registered before Sardarnagar Police Station Ahmedabad City, Dist. Ahmedabad for the offences under sections 406, 420, 467, 468, 471, 506(2), 294(b) and 120B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 against the respondent-accused and others. Respondent No.2 – accused - Pravinbhai Ravabhai Rabari was released on regular bail vide order dated 24.05.2021 passed in Criminal Misc. Application No.3410 of 2021 on following condition:

“Main Condition:

The applicant-accused shall deposit 25% of the outstanding amount i.e. Rs.70,94,950/- as per the argument and contentions of the petition within one month from today and the remaining 50% amount (deducting 25% of the amount already paid by the applicant-accused) shall be deposited within three months from the date of this order.”

6.1 Thus, the direction and condition issued in the said order was that the respondent No.2- accused shall deposit 25% of the outstanding amount i.e. Rs.70,94,950/- within a period of one month and the remaining amount was directed to be deposited within a period of three months.

7. Since, the said condition was not honoured by the respondent No.2-accused, the complainant– first informant filed Criminal Misc. Application No.5749 of 2021 seeking cancellation of bail. By the order dated 08.09.2021, Additional Sessions Judge (Court No.30), City Civil and Sessions Court, Ahmedabad, rejected the application by observing that the said condition was incorporated only in view of the submissions of the learned advocate and violation of the directions, which are issued on such statement, cannot be construed adverse, and the bail cannot be cancelled. Additional Sessions Judge, City Civil and Sessions Court, Ahmedabad, while passing the impugned order, has placed reliance on the judgement in case of Mahersing or His Successor In Office Intelligence Officer vs. Pradipkumar Bharatlal Poddar Director of M/s Suvidha, 2004 (4) G.L.R. 3332. This Court has perused the said judgement. On perusal o