Research › Search › Judgment

Gujarat High Court · body

2017 DIGILAW 1189 (GUJ)

Amratlal Laxmidas Ardeshana v. State of Gujarat

2017-07-03

A.Y.KOGJE

body2017
ORDER : A.Y. KOGJE, J. 1. This application is filed is filed by the original complainant for modification of the order dated 10.11.2014 passed by this Court granting interim relief in terms of paragraph 7(C), whereby the further proceedings in connection with C.R No.I-194/2014 registered with Vastrapur Police Station is stayed. 2. The learned advocate for the applicant submits that the applicant has been granted anticipatory bail for various conditions which included reporting to the concerned police station, marking presence at periodical intervals, surrendering of the Passport, etc. and that to the knowledge of the applicant the said conditions are not complied with by the applicant. He submits that in all likeliness the applicant has traveled abroad and may not be available for the trial of proceedings before this Court. 3. As against this, the learned advocate for the accused (respondents herein) submits that the anticipatory bail was granted by an order dated 17.10.2014 and pursuant to one of the conditions the applicants have reported time and again before the Investigating Officer. However, frequent arrest of the accused have not been effected in the meanwhile, this Court has stayed the proceedings. She submits that in view of the stay of further proceedings the arrest of the applicant has not bee effected and therefore, the conditions of bail would not come into operation till formal arrest of the applicant is effected. 4. However, to ensure the presence of the accused before this Court as well before trial court, if necessary, the accused persons are ready and willing to file individual undertaking in form of affidavit before this Court. 5. Having heard the rival submissions and having gone through the case papers, it appears that before effecting the actual arrest in connection with the aforementioned C.R, this Court has stayed the further proceedings and therefore, actual arrest of the accused persons is not effected and thereby the conditions of bail would not come into operation. 6. However, to overcome the apprehension raised by the complainant it would be sufficient if accused persons are directed to file an undertaking in form of affidavit before this Court within a period of two weeks from today to ensure their physical presence for the proceedings before this Court, and if need be, before trial court. 7. With this direction, the application stands disposed of.