In a recent judgment by the Gujarat High Court, anticipatory bail has been granted in the case of FIR CR No.11214042240135 of 2024. The court carefully considered the circumstances and decided in favor of the applicants, imposing specific conditions for their release. Details of the case and judgment are outlined in this summary.
Facts
- Petitioners are seeking anticipatory bail in case of their arrest in connection with an FIR registered with Olpad Police Station, Surat.
- Petitioners have approached the court under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.
- The FIR in question is C.R.No.11214042240135 of 2024.
- The petitioners have prayed to be released on anticipatory bail if they are arrested in relation to this FIR.
Arguments
- A written complaint was filed on 24.04.2023 at the concerned police station, suppressing facts of the filing of civil suits.
- The petitioners are claimed to be falsely implicated in the offense as per the learned advocate.
- The complainant changed his statement, alleging that the first 8 pages of the power of attorney were changed.
- Mr. Zahir Shaikh, the alleged power of attorney of the complainant, filed three suits, followed by the complainant filing one suit, totaling four pending suits before the Civil Court for the cancellation of power of attorney and sale deed.
- In the ongoing civil proceedings, there is no interim relief in favor of the complainant.
- Previously, the complainant had filed a written complaint before the Olpad Police Station with similar allegations, leading to a detailed report on 22.04.2021 concluding that there was no substantial basis for lodging an FIR.
- Petitioner purchased stamp paper and signed a sale deed allegedly executed on a forged power of attorney.
- The petitioners are residents of Surat and willing to cooperate in the investigation.
- Complainant alleges that one petitioner changed stamp papers, struck out lines, and altered the first 8 pages of the power of attorney in collaboration with the main accused.
- There is a delay of 5 years in filing the FIR.
- Complainant was aware of the alleged forgery in 2019 but delayed filing a criminal complaint.
- The prosecution argues that due to the seriousness of the offense involving property fraud, the petitioners should not be granted anticipatory bail.
- The nephew of the main accused is among the accused, indicating that they are not merely employees but likely collaborators in the alleged offense.
Analysis
- The learned advocate for the complainant argued that three suits are collusive while one is filed by the complainant, but civil litigation is pending before the appropriate Court.
- There is a delay of at least 8 to 9 months in filing an FIR, even in the last civil suit filed by the complainant in 2023.
- The role of the petitioners is considered truncated in this case.
- Factors considered while considering bail application include prima facie evidence, nature and gravity of accusation, severity of punishment, risk of accused absconding, character of the accused, likelihood of offense being repeated, apprehension of witnesses being influenced, and the danger of justice being thwarted by granting bail.
- The court, exercising discretion in favor of the petitioners, considers the law laid down by the Apex Court in Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre vs. State of Maharashtra and Ors.
- The dispute pertains to documentary evidence already filed in civil proceedings, available with the Investigating Officer.
- A comprehensive report filed by Olpad Police Station was not challenged before any higher court or forum.
- The petitioners are accused of swindling immovable property and should be dismissed according to the complainant.
- Without delving into detailed evidence, the court is inclined to exercise discretion in favor of the petitioners considering the aspects related to the forged power of attorney in 2019, the report filed in the same year, and the involvement of the petitioners in the execution of a sale deed on a forged power of attorney.
- The court must judiciously and cautiously exercise its discretion in compliance with principles laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court.
- All the above aspects are deemed sufficient to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.
- The present petition is allowed, directing that the applicants will be released on bail upon arrest pursuant to FIR CR No.11214042240135 of 2024 from Olpad Police Station, Surat.
- Bail conditions include a personal bond of Rs. 10,000 each with a surety of the same amount.
- The applicants must cooperate with the investigation, make themselves available for interrogation, and be present at the Police Station on specific dates.
- They are prohibited from influencing witnesses, obstructing the investigation, or leaving India without court permission.
- If in possession of a passport, it must be deposited before the trial court within a week.
Decision
- Petitioners must adhere to specific conditions listed by the Court.
- Breach of conditions will result in appropriate action by the concerned Judge.
- Direct service is allowed, and Court can modify conditions as per the law.
- Trial Court should not be influenced by earlier observations made by this Court during bail.
Case Title: MOHAMMAD KAMAL MOHAMMAD SHEKH Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT
Case Number: R/CR.MA/7876/2024
