NIRZAR S. DESAI, J.

1. Heard learned advocate Mr.Barot for the applicant, learned Additional Public Prosecutor Ms.Pathak for the respondent – State and learned advocate Mr.Dave for the original complainant.

2. By this application filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, the applicant is seeking release on regular bail in connection with the FIR being CR No.11209020221385 of 2022 registered with Idar Police Station, Dist.Sabarkantha for offences punishable under Sections 408, 409, 406, 420, 465, 467, 468, 471 and 120B of Indian Penal Code.

3. Learned advocate for the applicant submitted that, the applicant is not involved in commission of offence as alleged in the FIR and therefore, looking to the role of the applicant and nature of the allegations, the applicant is required to be enlarged on regular bail by imposing suitable terms and conditions.

4. On the other hand, learned APP appearing for the respondent – State vehemently submits that, the offences which have been charged are serious in nature affecting the society at large and looking to the facts as well as the allegations made against the applicant, no discretion would be required to be exercised.

4.1. Learned advocate Mr. P. M. Dave appearing for the original complainant vehemently opposed this application and by relying upon the observations made by the learned Trial Court while rejecting the bail application submitted that in view of the aforesaid observations, this Court may not enlarge the present applicant on bail.

5. In the facts and circumstances of the case and considering the nature of allegations, this Court is of the opinion that, discretion is required to be exercised to enlarge the applicant on regular bail. This Court has considered the following facts while exercising discretion in favour of the applicant :-

(i) the applicant is in jail since 28.01.2023;

(ii) the investigation is over, charge-sheet is filed;

(iii) the present applicant is not the main accused of the entire scam and out of 177 tractors, he is the beneficiary for an amount towards 21 tractors only;

(iv) as per the charge-sheet papers the role of the present applicant is that he has sold 21 tractors amounting to Rs.40,50,000/- only and the amount received by the present applicant was forwarded to accused no.16 and he has received monitory benefit of Rs.2,10,000/- @ Rs.10,000/- per tractor;

(v) learned advocate for the applicant, upon instructions, states that the applicant on his own volition shall deposit an amount of Rs.2,10,000/- before the trial Court within one month from the date of his release subject to rights and contentions of the applicant and shall file undertaking to that effect within a period of two weeks from the date of his release and he does not have any objection if the original complainant, upon making application before the trial Court, withdraws the said amount or the trial Court itself after considering such application, disburses said amount in favour of original complainant and assuring about the deposition of amount states that non-deposition of such amount and breach of any of the condition shall result into cancellation of bail of the present applicant automatically;

(vi) learned advocate Mr.Barot further states that undertaking to the effect of the statement made above in (v) shall be filed within a period of two weeks immediately after the release of the applicant, before the trial Court;

(vii) learned advocate Mr.Dave under the instructions of the complainant does not have any objection if the applicant is released on such condition of depositing the amount, however, requests this Court that since this order being passed on condition of deposition of such amount, in case of failure of deposition of the amount, he may be permitted to move before the trial Court for cancellation of such bail.

(iix) in case of failure of deposition of amount, as assured by learned advocate Mr.Barot, the bail shall stand cancelled automatically, as stated in para:5(v) above, and even trial Court is free to cancell the bail, on making application by the complainant on the ground of non-deposition of amount within time bound schedule as assured by learned advocate Mr.Barot for the applicant and as consented by learned advocate Mr.Dave for the original complainant.

6. In view of the aforesaid facts, without discussing the evidence in detail, this Court, prima facie, is of the opinion that, this is a fit case to exercise the discretion and enlarge the applicant on regular bail. Hence, present application is allowed and the applicant is ordered to be released on regular bail in connection with the FIR being CR No.11209020221385 of 2022 registered with Idar Police Station, Dist.Sabarkantha on executing personal bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten thousand only) with one surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court and subject to the conditions that he shall;

[a] not take undue advantage of liberty or misuse liberty;

[b] not act in a manner injuries to the interest of the prosecution;

[c] surrender passport, if any, to the lower court within a week;

[d] not leave India without prior permission of the Sessions Judge concerned;

[e] furnish latest address of residence to the Investigating Officer and also to the Court at the time of execution of the bond and shall not change the residence without prior permission of the trial Court;

[f] mark presence before the concerned police station in the first week of every month till the trial is over;

[g] shall deposit an amount of Rs.2,10,000/- before the trial Court within one month from the date of his release subject to rights and contentions of the applicant and shall file undertaking to that effect within a period of two weeks from the date of his release and he does not have any objection if the original complainant, upon making application before the trial Court, withdraws the said amount or the trial Court itself after considering such application, disburses said amount in favour of original complainant and assuring about the deposition of amount states that non-deposition of such amount and breach of any of the condition shall result into cancellation of bail of the present applicant automatically;

[h] in case of failure of deposition of amount, as assured by learned advocate Mr.Barot, the bail shall stand cancelled automatically, as stated in para:5(v) above, and even trial Court is free to cancell the bail, on making application by the complainant on the ground of non-deposition of amount within time bound schedule as assured by learned advocate Mr.Barot for the applicant and as consented by learned advocate Mr.Dave for the original complainant.

7. The Authorities will release the applicant only if the applicant is not required in connection with any other offence for the time being. If breach of any of the above conditions is committed, the Sessions Judge concerned will be free to issue warrant or take appropriate action in the matter. Bail bond to be executed before the learned Lower Court having jurisdiction to try the case. It will be open for the concerned Court to delete, modify and/or relax any of the above conditions, in accordance with law. At the trial, learned Trial Court shall not be influenced by the observations of preliminary nature, qua the evidence at this stage, made by this Court while enlarging the applicant on bail.

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