Roshni Dashrathlal Patel vs State Of Gujarat

Ilesh J. Vora, J

By way of the present application under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, the applicant - accused has prayed for anticipatory

bail in connection with the FIR being C.R. No.11209056210789 of 2021 registered with Himmatnagar “B†Division Police Station, Dist.

Sabarkantha for the offences under Sections 406, 409, 420, 465, 467, 468, 471, 167 and 120(B) of IPC.

Learned advocate for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the alleged offence. The applicant is appointed on

contractual basis for a period of 11 months and she has been given instructions by her superior officer and accordingly, she was doing her job. The

custodial interrogation of the applicant is not essential for the purpose of investigation.

Learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the respondent â€" State has opposed grant of anticipatory bail stating inter alia that

the allegations against the applicant are grave and serious in nature and custodial interrogation is necessary for further investigation of the case.

Having heard the learned advocates for the parties and perusing the material placed on record and taking into consideration the facts of the case, it

appears that the present applicant was serving on contractual basis as a Research Officer for a period of 11 months in the Office of District Planning

Officer at Himmatnagar. It further appears that before signing the letter of releasing the grant, the applicant had talked with accused no.1 namely Mr.

Joshi â€" District Planning Officer and based on his confirmation, she signed the approval of grant. There is no any allegation that the applicant

received any benefit from the alleged act of signing the letter. The applicant has no role to play whatsoever in the opening of the account and no any

amount has been withdrawn by the applicant. Under such circumstances, when the applicant has cooperated with the investigation and in absence of

any past antecedents of like nature, no custodial interrogation of the present applicant is required. Considering the role attributed to the present

applicant in the alleged crime, without entering into the merits of the case, the matter deserves consideration.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the role attributed to the present applicant in the alleged offence, I find no reason to

decline pre-arrest bail to the applicant. In the result, the present application is allowed. The applicant is ordered to be released on bail in the event of

her arrest in connection with a FIR being C.R. No.11209056210789 of 2021 registered with Himmatnagar “B†Division Police Station, Dist.

Sabarkantha on her executing a personal bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand Only) with one surety of like amount on the following conditions:

(a) shall cooperate with the investigation and make herself available for interrogation whenever required;

(b) shall remain present at concerned Police Station on 28.01.2022 between 11.00 a.m. and 2.00 p.m.;

(c) shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the fact of the case so as to dissuade him

from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer;

(d) shall not obstruct or hamper the police investigation and not to play mischief with the evidence collected or yet to be collected by the police;

(e) shall at the time of execution of bond, furnish the address to the investigating officer and the court concerned and shall not change their residence

till the final disposal of the case till further orders;

(f) shall not leave India without the permission of the Trial Court and if having passport shall deposit the same before the Trial Court within a week;

and

(g) it would be open to the Investigating Officer to file an application for remand if he considers it proper and just and the learned Magistrate would

decide it on merits;

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.

At the trial, the Trial Court shall not be influenced by the prima facie observations made by this Court in the present order.

Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent. Direct service is permitted.