IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
J. C. Doshi, J.
Alpaben Jayprakashbhai Sharma & Anr. - Appellant
Vs.
State Of Gujarat - Respondent
Criminal Misc. Application (For Anticipatory Bail) No. 5236 of 2024
Decided On : 03-04-2024
ANTICIPATORY BAIL - Criminal Procedure - Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - Section 438 - The court discussed the nature of the allegations, role attributed to the accused, and the settlement arrived at between the parties. The court considered the factors to be borne in mind while considering an application for bail and exercised its discretion in favor of the petitioners. The court also referred to the law laid down in the cases of Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre vs. State of Maharashtra and Ors., Shri Gurubaksh Singh Sibbia & Ors. Vs. State of Punjab, and Sushila Agarwal v/s. State (NCT of Delhi) to support its decision.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioners sought anticipatory bail in connection with an FIR registered with Vastrapur Police Station, Ahmedabad City. The petitioners were accused of being involved in a fraudulent property transaction and were seeking bail based on the settlement arrived at between the parties.
Finding of the Court:
The court, without discussing the evidence in detail, exercised its discretion in favor of the petitioners, considering the nature of allegations, role attributed to the accused, and the settlement between the parties. The court also referred to relevant legal provisions and previous court decisions to support its decision.
Issues: The main issue was whether the petitioners should be granted anticipatory bail in connection with the FIR registered against them.
Ratio Decidendi: The court considered the nature of the allegations, role attributed to the accused, and the settlement arrived at between the parties. It also referred to the factors to be borne in mind while considering an application for bail and the relevant legal provisions and previous court decisions.
Final Decision: The court allowed the petition and directed that the petitioners shall be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond with specified conditions.
ORDER :
1. By way of the present petition under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, the petitioners have prayed for their release on anticipatory bail in case of arrest in connection with the FIR registered as C.R.No.11191020230357 of 2023 registered with Vastrapur Police Station, Ahmedabad City.
2. Learned advocate for the petitioners submits that considering the nature of allegations, role attributed to the petitioners, the petitioners may be enlarged on anticipatory bail by imposing suitable conditions.
3. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the respondent-State has opposed grant of anticipatory bail looking to the nature and gravity of the offence.
4. Heard the learned Advocates for the respective parties and perused the papers.
5. Having heard the learned advocate for the parties and perusing the investigation papers, it is equally incumbent upon the Court to exercise its discretion judiciously, cautiously and strictly in compliance with the basic principles laid down in a plethora of decisions of the Hon’ble Apex Court on the point. It is well settled that, among other circumstances, the factors to be borne in mind while considering an application for bail are (i) whether there is any prima facie or reasonable ground to believe that the accused had committed the offence; (ii) nature and gravity of the accusation; (iii) severity of the punishment in the event of conviction; (iv) danger of the accused absconding or fleeing, if released on bail; (v) character, behaviour, means, position and standing of the accused; (vi) likelihood of the offence being repeated; (vii) reasonable apprehension of the witnesses being influenced; and (viii) danger, of course, of justice being thwarted by grant of bail. Though at the stage of granting bail an elaborate examination of evidence and detailed reasons touching the merit of the case, which may prejudice the accused, should be avoided. I have considered the following aspects.
(2) the allurement was made to the effect that if the complainant executes sale-deed of his immovable property in favour of present petitioners, they would get the loan from the Bank and pursuant to such allurement complainant executed sale-deed in favour of present petitioners. It was placed before the concerned Bank to obtain the loan. The immovable property was mortgaged and the loan was disbursed which was taken away by the accused no.1 Pranjal Sunil Sharma.
(3) In this ring of incident, complainant and the petitioners became the victim. On one hand, complainant’s immovable property is now standing in the name of petitioners and on the other hand, the petitioners, who were not intending to keep their property in their name, could not re-execute the sale- deed in favour of the complainant as the loan is availed. However, the person who is beneficiary of the loan amount i.e. accused no.1 is on the run. With this chequered facts, the settlement is arrived at between the present petitioners and the complainant in a way that present petitioners shall not claim any right, title or interest in the immovable properties i.e. House No.A/6/161, Orchid Greed Field, Applewood Township, Shela, Ahmedabad and House No.903, Nupur Tower, Satellite, Ahmedabad. To give effect to their words, both the petitioners have affidavit which are taken on record which are in verbatim and paras:3, 4 and 5 of affidavits of both the petitioners read as follow:
“ Affidavit filed by Alpaben Jayprakashbhai Sharma:
3. I declare that the complainant is paying the loan amount and I further undertake that as soon as the loan amount of the respective bank is cleared, I and the applicant no.02 shall immediately execute reverse sale deed in connection with the aforementioned premises or an agreement for cancellation of sale d
Shri Gurubaksh Singh Sibbia & Ors. Vs. State of Punjab (1980) 2 SCC 665
The court's decision was influenced by the nature of the allegations, role attributed to the accused, and the settlement arrived at between the parties, as well as the relevant legal provisions and p....
The court established that anticipatory bail can be granted even in cases involving serious allegations if the circumstances do not warrant custodial interrogation and the accused demonstrate a willi....
Anticipatory bail under Section 438 CrPC is an extraordinary remedy, granted only in exceptional circumstances, particularly when the applicant is not a proclaimed offender.
Anticipatory bail may be granted when allegations are civil in nature, ensuring proper conditions to safeguard judicial proceedings.
applicant is not entitled for anticipatory bail on the ground that applicant was not only declared proclaimed offender under Section 82 Cr.P.C. but proclamation of attachment of property was also iss....
The court may grant anticipatory bail based on the compromise between the parties and the petitioner's cooperation with the investigation.
Anticipatory bail may be granted in pending criminal investigation with conditions to ensure compliance and judicial oversight.
The court's decision was influenced by the timing of the incident, the filing of the FIR, and the applicant's willingness to cooperate in the investigation in granting anticipatory bail.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.