Dargaram Danaram (In Fir Daanaram Chhelaram) vs State Of Gujarat

Nikhil S. Kariel, J

Heard learned Advocate Shri Rahul K. Dave for the applicant and learned APP Ms. Maithili D. Mehta for the respondent- State.

By way of this application the applicant prays for being released on regular bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 on

account of his arrest in connection with the Criminal Complaint being FIR No. 11207028201021 of 2020 registered with Halol Police Station, District:

Panchmahals on 06.12.2020 for the offences punishable under Sections 3, 4 ,5 and 6 of the Immoral Traffic ( Prevention ) Act.

3.It is submitted by learned Advocate for the applicant that the applicant was Manager of the Guest House concerned where the alleged activities

prohibited under the Immoral Traffic ( Prevention) Act were going on. He further submits that he was not involved in the crime as such and merely

because he happed to be manning the guest house at the relevant point of time, he has been roped in as accused in the present complaint. He further

submits that from the allegation levelled in the complaint, it is clear that what is alleged against the present applicant would be offence punishable

under Sections 3 and 4 of the Immoral Traffic ( Prevention ) Act and stretching it to maximum, it would be an offence punishable under Section 5 of

the Immoral Traffic ( Prevention ) Act and whereas there is nothing to show that an offence punishable under Section 6 of the Immoral Traffic (

Prevention ) Act had been committed by him. Furthermore learned Advocate submits that since this is the first offence of the present applicant and

whereas since the maximum period of punishment prescribed insofar as the alleged offence was not more than seven years therefore considering the

overall situation he requests that this Court may release the present applicant on regular bail.

Learned APP has strongly opposes grant of bail to the present applicant by submitting that the present applicant was in direct contact with other

accused who had facilitated commission of the offence concerned. She further states that statement of the lady who was found at the site also clearly

implicates the present applicant. Therefore she submits that no interference may be made by this Court at this stage.

Considering the fact that this is application for regular bail, learned Advocates for the parties do not seek any further reasoned order.

I have heard learned Advocates for the respective parties and perused the papers. Following aspects are considered:

(1) The offences alleged against the present applicant would be under Sections 3, 4 and 5 of the Immoral Traffic ( Prevention ) Act whereas

maximum punishment prescribed is for seven years;

(2) That the applicant is not stated to be involved in any offence of the like nature hereinbefore and

(3) That the applicant is in custody since 06.12.2020.

This Court has taken into consideration the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Sanjay Chandra V. Central Bureau of

Investigation reported in [2012]1 SCC 40 .

In the facts and circumstances of the case and considering the nature of the allegations made in the First Information Report, without discussing the

evidence in detail, prima facie, this Court is of the opinion that this is a fit case to exercise the discretion and enlarge the applicant on regular bail.

Hence, the present application is allowed. The applicant is ordered to be released on regular bail in connection with Criminal Complaint being FIR

No. 11207028201021 of 2020 registered with Halol Police Station, District: Panchmahal on executing a bond of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty

Thousand only) with one surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court and subject to the conditions that he shall;

(a) not take undue advantage of liberty or misuse liberty;

(b) not act in a manner injurious to the interest of the prosecution;

(c) surrender his passport, if any, to the lower court within a week;

(d) not leave the State of Gujarat without prior permission of the Sessions Judge concerned;

(e) mark presence in the concerned Police Station on every Monday of each English Calendar month for a period of six months and thereafter any

day of the first week of every English calendar month for a period of six months between 11.00 a.m. and 2.00 p.m. ;

(f) furnish the present address of residence along with the proof to the Investigating Officer concerned and also to the trial court at the time of

execution of the bond and shall indicate change of residential address if any to the trial court.

The Competent Authority will release the applicant only if he is not required in connection with any other offence for the time being. If breach of

any of the above conditions is committed, the Sessions Judge concerned will be free to issue warrant or take appropriate action in the matter.

Bail bond to be executed before the lower court having jurisdiction to try the case. It will be open for the concerned Court to delete, modify and/or

relax any of the above conditions in accordance with law.

11 At the stage of trial, the Trial Court shall not be influenced by the observations of this Court which are of preliminary nature made at this stage only

for the purpose of considering the application of the applicant for being released on bail. Rule made absolute to the aforesaid extent.

Direct service through electronic mode is permitted.