In a recent legal ruling by the Gujarat High Court, anticipatory bail has been granted in the case related to the FIR registered at Dhanpur Police Station, Dahod. The Court considered various precedents, including the case law from the Supreme Court, to reach this decision. Stay tuned for more updates on this developing legal situation.
Facts
- The applicant-accused has filed an application under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.
- The applicant-accused seeks anticipatory bail in connection with FIR C.R. No.11821014240149 of 2024 registered with Dhanpur Police Station, Dahod.
- The Learned APP has waived service of rule for the respondent-State.
Arguments
- Learned advocate for the applicant argued that the applicant is apprehending arrest in connection with the FIR and previous applications for anticipatory bail were disallowed by the Sessions Court.
- Learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the respondent – State opposed the grant of anticipatory bail, stating that the applicant allegedly subjected the prosecutrix to physical relations without her consent while everyone in the family was asleep.
- The prosecutrix initially lacked the courage to lodge the FIR but later filed it after consulting the Sarpanch of the village.
- The Public Prosecutor urged the court to dismiss the present application for anticipatory bail.
Analysis
- Delay in lodging FIR is explained by lack of courage cited by the first informant but appears implausible.
- Incident occurred on 10.11.2023, yet FIR was lodged on 09.02.2024, indicating a significant delay.
- Allegation against the applicant is forcibly establishing physical relations with the prosecutrix during night hours.
- Proscutrix did not inform anyone in the village about the incident or lodge a complaint immediately after the alleged incident.
- Key factors for consideration in the case according to Hon’ble Supreme Court decisions are the prima facie case and the need for the accused’s custodial interrogation.
- The court is inclined to consider the case of the applicant based on the facts and circumstances.
- The FIR was lodged only after consulting the Sarpanch, raising questions about the delayed reporting of the incident.
- The court considered the law laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre Vs. State of Maharashtra and Ors., [2011] 1 SCC 694.
- The court also took into consideration the law laid down by the Constitution Bench in the case of Shri Gurubaksh Singh Sibbia & Ors. Vs. State of Punjab, (1980) 2 SCC 565.
- Reference was made to the ratio laid down in the case of Sushila Aggarwal and Ors. v. State (NCT of Delhi) and Anr. in Special Leave Petition No. 7281-7282/2017 dated 29.01.2020.
- The judgment in the case of Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar reported in (2014) 8 SCC 273 was considered where the Court observed that discretion should be exercised when there is a punishment of 7 years.
- The Court acknowledged that by exercising discretion under Section 438 Cr.P.C, the doors of remand by the Investigating Officer are open and hence the Court decided to exercise powers under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. 9.
- Ultimately, the present application was allowed by the Court.
- Cooperate with the investigation and make available for interrogation whenever required
- Remain present at concerned Police Station on 26.06.2024 between 12.00 Noon and 2.00 p.m.
- Not make any inducement, threat or promise to dissuade witnesses from disclosing facts
- Not obstruct or hamper the police investigation or tamper with evidence
- Furnish the address to the investigating officer and court and not change residence until final disposal of the case
- Not leave India without permission of the trial court and deposit passport if having one
- Trial court should not be influenced by the prima facie observations made by this Court in the present order
Decision
- The applicant is ordered to be released on anticipatory bail in the event of arrest in connection with FIR No. C.R. No.11821014240149 of 2024 registered with Dhanpur Police Station, Dahod.
- The release is conditional upon executing a personal bond of Rs.10,000/- with one surety of the same amount.
- The applicant must comply with the specified conditions to avail the anticipatory bail.
- The bail is granted to ensure the applicant’s cooperation with the legal proceedings.
Case Title: CHANDRABHAI VARIYABHAI RATHOD Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT
Case Number: R/CR.MA/11016/2024
