Manishkumar Babubhai Mistry vs State Of Gujarat

Ashutosh J. Shastri, J

Rule. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor waives service of notice of Rule on behalf of respondent â€" State.

1.0 Present application is filed under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking Anticipatory Bail as the applicant is apprehending arrest

in connection F.I.R. bearing I-C.R.No.01 of 2020 registered with ACB Rural Police Station, Bharuch for the alleged offences punishable under

Sections 7(a), 7A and 12 of the Prevention of Corruption Act.

2.0 Heard, learned advocate for the applicant as well as learned Additional Public Prosecutor Mr.Ronak Raval.

3.0 Mr.Nisarg Jain, learned advocate for the applicant, has submitted that the applicant is an innocent person and has wrongly been arraigned in the

prosecution. It has further been submitted that the applicant is serving in the police department by-now for more than a period of 24 years and there is

not a single criminal complaint is lodged against the applicant, in past. It has been submitted that if anticipatory bail is not granted, his entire long

standing career would be at jeopardy. On the contrary, the incident in question has happened on 15.2.2020, wherein the complainant was coming from

a wrong side and caused the incident and the amount which has been mentioned in the complaint was related to the damage to the car and it has

nothing to do with an incident as narrated in the FIR. Learned advocate has pointed out that in fact, certain bills about repairs are attached to the

application and has submitted that the applicant is an innocent person. Apart from that, it has been submitted that looking to his entire long career, a

protection be made available, otherwise there will be serious consequences in his service career and the applicant is ready and willing to present

himself as and when require and will also cooperate with the investigation and report the concerned police station.

4.0 As against this, Mr.Ronak Raval, learned APP, has submitted that the applicant is arraigned in a serious crime of corruption and the applicant had

tried to take an illegal gratification from the complainant and the car damage story which has been put up by the applicant, is nothing but a concoction

on his part. Learned APP has submitted that in a systematic manner, the money is demanded from the complainant and, therefore, in such a serious

situation, the applicant may not be granted the anticipatory bail. Learned APP has further pointed out that audio recording is available of the applicant

which reflects that the allegations levelled in the FIR may have some substance. Hence, by pointing out report to this Court dated 20.7.2020, a request

is made not to exercise the discretion in favour of the applicant. However, the learned APP could not point out that in long standing career of 24 years

of the applicant, any complaint of this nature is levelled against the applicant and has left it to the discretion of the Court.

5.0 Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and having gone through overall material on record, prima facie, it appears from the

document attached to the application that the applicant has to his credit long standing 24 years of service. According to the report, except few minor

instances, there is no such kind of criminal complaint or case is registered against the applicant. Further, considering the fact that there is an assertion

on the part of the applicant which is yet to be examined and since the applicant is not likely to run away and is willing to abide by any of the conditions

imposed by this Court, the Court is inclined to consider the request of the applicant.

6.0 This Court has also taken into consideration the law laid down by the Apex Court in the case of Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre v. State of

Maharashtra & Ors. reported in [2011] 1 SCC 694, wherein, the Apex Court reiterated the law laid down by the Constitutional Bench in the case of

Shri Gurubaksh Singh Sibbia & Ors. reported in [1980] 2 SCC 565.

7.0 Learned Counsel for the parties do not press for further reasoned order.

8.0 In the result, this application is allowed. It is directed that, in the event, the applicant herein is arrested pursuant to F.I.R. bearing I- C.R.No.01 of

2020 registered with ACB Rural Police Station, Bharuch, the applicant shall be released on bail on furnishing a bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten

Thousand only) with one surety of like amount on following conditions :-

[a] shall cooperate with the investigation and make himself available for interrogation whenever required;

[b] shall remain present at concerned Police Station on 1st August, 2020 between 11.00 am to 2.00 pm;

[c] shall not hamper the investigation in any manner nor shall directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any witness so as to

dissuade them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any Police Officer;

[d] shall at the time of execution of bond, furnish the address to the Investigating Officer and the Court concerned and shall not change the residence

till the final disposal of the case or till further orders;

[e] will not leave India without the permission of the Court and, if is holding a Passport, shall surrender the same before the trial Court immediately.

[f] It would be open to the Investigating Officer to file an application for remand, if h considers it just and proper and the concerned Magistrate would

decide it on merits.

[g] despite this order, it would be open for the Investigating Agency to apply to the competent Magistrate, for police remand of the applicant. The

applicant shall remain present before the learned Magistrate on the first date of hearing of such application and on all subsequent occasions, as may be

directed by the learned Magistrate. This would be sufficient to treat the accused in the judicial custody for the purpose of entertaining application of

the prosecution for police remand. This is, however, without prejudice to the right of the accused to seek stay against an order of remand, if ultimately

granted, and the power of the learned Magistrate to consider such a request in accordance with law. It is clarified that the 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

anticipatory bail order.

9.0 Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent.

10.0 The Registry is directed to communicate this order by fax or e-mail to the trial court.