#interogationincustody

[seemabhatnagar]

Granting anticipatory Bail at the preliminary stage of investigation may hamper investigation

Ajayraj v. State of Gujrat

Anticipatory Bail 18552/2023

Before High Court of Gujrat

Anticipatory Bail application of the accused was dismissed by Hon’ble Mr. Justice Hasmukh D Suthar J. vide order dt.03.11.2023 because of the seriousness of the charge, prima facie involvement of accused and possibility of tempering with evidences.

Fact

An FIR U/s 419, 420, 465, 467, 468, 471 and 114 IPC is lodged against the accused Ajayraj ibn the year 2016.The accused Ajayraj has moved an application u/s 438 Cr P C for anticipatory bail.

Submission of the Counsel of the accused before the High Court

The applicant accused has no role in the offence of forgery.

Offence took place in the year 2014 and FIR against him was filed in the year 2016 based on the FSL Report.

Applicant is shown as absconding whereas the police has never visited his place.

Nothing is required to be recovered from the applicant accused as such he be allowed anticipatory bail.

Submission of the State Counsel Opposing Anticipatory Bail application

Chargesheet filed against the applicant accused is showing him absconding since 2016.

Applicant has entered into a deal with the co-accused and created forged documents & appeared in the competitive examination for the post of Clerk on behalf of co-accused Udayraj Brijlal Meena.

Other co-accused Vikas & Bhupendra are also shown in the chargesheet as absconding & are yet to be arrested.

Prima facie involvement of the applicant accused is there & therefore custodial interrogation is required.

Hon’ble Court was requested not to exercise the discretion in favor of the applicant abd dismiss his present application.

Observation of the Court

It is incumbent upon the Court to exercise its discretion judiciously, cautiously and strictly while considering an application for bail.

Though at the stage of granting bail an elaborate examination of evidence and detailed reasons touching the merit of the case, which may prejudice the accused, should be avoided by the Court.

The applicant is facing serious charge of forgery.

In cases related to competitive examination are concerned, misconduct, misbehaviour, malpractices and cheating is required to be dealt with strictly.

In the competitive examination where many incumbent candidates burn their midnight oil to secure the government job and are eagerly waiting for the government jobs, they are ultimately deprived due to such unscrupulous elements and their dishonest activity and malpractice.

Considering the facts and the material available against the accused it is clear that complaint against him has not been made with a view to humiliate him and considering allegation made in the FIR custodial interrogation is necessary.

Arrest is part of the process of investigation and intended to secure several purposes in which the accused may provide information, during the discovery of material facts and relevant information.

It is needless to say that order under Section 438 of CrPC is not a passport to the commission offence nor a shield against any serious accusation, which adversely affects the society.

Order

Since applicant is actively involved in the offence and if applicant is equipped with an order of anticipatory bail before he is interrogated by the Police, it would greatly harm the investigation and would impede the prospects of unearthing the truth.

Considered the nature and seriousness of the charge, prima facie involvement of accused and possibility of tempering with evidences, it does not appear to be just and proper to exercise the discretion in favor of the applicant. Anticipatory Bail application is dismissed.

Seema Bhatnagar