The court held that the mere fact that the offences were punishable with a maximum of 7 years' imprisonment was not a ground to grant anticipatory bail, and that the court must consider the gravity of the offence, the impact on society, and the need for a fair and free investigation when deciding an application for anticipatory bail.

ORDER

[1.0] RULE returnable forthwith. Learned APP waives service of notice for the respondent-State.

[2.0] By way of the present successive application under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, the applicant accused has prayed to release him on anticipatory bail in the event of his arrest in connection with the FIR being C.R. No.11822015230772 of 2022 with Jalalpore Police Station, District Navsari for the offences punishable under Sections 465, 467, 468, 471, 201 and 120(B) of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.

[3.0] Brief facts of the case are that the present applicant – accused in connivance with the co-accused has prepared a power of attorney on 31.05.2005 of the father of the complainant and on the basis of the same, sold out the property of the father of the complainant in favor of wife of accused No.1 whereas the father of the complainant viz. Keshavbhai Rambhai Patel died way back on 25.05.1984. It is further the case of the prosecution that, the present applicant had identified a person viz.

Keshavbhai Rambhai Patel as father of the complainant despite knowing the fact he has died before 20 years and in these circumstances the FIR came to be filed.

[4.0] Learned advocate Mr. B.M. Mangukiya for the applicant has submitted that the applicant has nothing to do with the offence and is falsely implicated. It is submitted that the complaint was filed belatedly though the alleged forged power of attorney was created in the month of May, 1984. Further, the offences alleged against the applicant are punishable with maximum imprisonment of 7 years. Nothing is required to be recovered or discovered from the present applicant. Even, the charge-sheet is filed wherein also clearly stated the alleged forged power of attorney is not available and charge under section 201 of the IPC is also alleged. Considering the aforesaid fact, in absence of any document, no offence is made out qua forgery. Even, the applicant is not at all aware as to whether the power of attorney on the basis of which sale deed is forged and fabricated document. Further, the applicant is local inhabitant of Navsari and there is no flight risk and as the entire case is based on documentary evidence which is already in the custody of the investigating agency, no custodial interrogation of the applicant is required. Hence, he has requested to allow the present application.

[5.0] Learned APP has taken this Court through the FIR and other investigation papers and has submitted that, prima facie, there is a strong case against the applicant. He has further submitted that present is a successive anticipatory bail application. Present applicant is out of reach of the investigation and even warrant under Section 70 of the CrPC is also issued against the applicant and earlier bail application came to be disposed of as withdrawn but no liberty as given and therefore, successive application for anticipatory bail is not maintainable. Present applicant has scuttled the investigation since long and tampered with evidence taking undue advantage and due to this forged document also could not be collected by the investigating agency and therefore also, custodial interrogation of the applicant is required and even the Notary before whom the document was executed is also required to be thoroughly investigated. Further, if the applicant is released on bail, the investigation may never reach to its conclusion. The applicant is an absconder, and this is successive bail application earlier application being disposed of as withdrawn. Hence, he has requested to dismiss the present application.

[6.0] Heard the learned advocates for the respective parties and considered the FIR as well as the charge-sheet papers. I have also perused the warrant dated 15.03.2024 issued under Section 70 of the CrPC against the present applicant. The applicant has till date did not appear or join the investigation even pursuant to the issuance of warrant under Section 70 of the CrPC. Hence, the applicant